I've been feeling a little out of sorts today, so I simply kicked back and watched the television.
No Comment.
I decided in order to 'get into the groove' this evening I'd play "Slacker Uprising" in the headphones. It's late, don't want to disturb anyone. There is something about the 'smell of napalm in the morning' that gets the juices flowing again.
But, sadly, Former First Lady Barbara Bush has experienced a stenotic Aortic Heart Valve. I hope Mrs. Bush is recovering without incident.
I am curious about something though. Imagine me curious about anything, but, on this 'health care issue' I am curious about something.
There is a study, an introductory study in 2007, by the Providence Heart and Vascular Institute in Portland, Oregon that discusses the "Cost-effectiveness of aortic valve replacement in the elderly." Imagine that, a health care institution that specializes in heart and vascular systems interested in cost-effectiveness. I would think that the cost of such life saving procedures would be exploited as a speciality, wouldn't you?
But, at any rate, there is this study:
...RESULTS (click here): The overall cost-effectiveness ratio was approximately 13,528 dollars per quality-adjusted life year gained. (I like the way that put that. You know? COST EFFECTIVENESS RATIO ... PER QUALITY - ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR GAINED.) The cost-effectiveness ratio increased according to age at surgery, up to 19,826 dollars per quality-adjusted life year for octogenarians and 27,182 dollars per quality-adjusted life year for nonagenarians....
It is an interesting thought, isn't it? Cost Effectiveness ratio ... per quality - adjusted life gained. I think the words 'life gained' is the most comforting aspect of this particular cost effectiveness approach.
I am not saying that this is the ONLY cost effectiveness ratio that is exclusive to any one approach, but, the 'idea' that cost effectiveness actually 'clings' to the concept of LIFE GAINED brings a 'quality in health care' concept that is most attractive to Americans seeking health care for the country.
But, let's see how much the surgery for Mrs. Bush would be.
She was born in June of 1925. So, that would make her 83 years old. So, now that her life has been saved she would fall into the category above of having the cost of her life saving procedure of $19,826 per year of life gained. Now, I don't think any institution actually bills for each year that goes by, so let's figure she lives at least another 10 years, which I am hopeful she will. That would make the cost of the life saving Aortic Value Replacement approximately $198,260.
I doubt seriously she has PRIVATE health insurance. You know she might. Being a dedicated Republican, she might have a PRIVATE health care insurance policy since their PHILOSOPHY dictates these things. But, in all seriousness, she is a Former First Lady that is taken care of by the American People.
Being a compassionate Former First Lady, I am sure she and every member of her family feeling an indebtness to the generosity of the American People in the care and compassion shown their Former First Lady will extend a deep regard to the fact that EVERY American needing a Cost Effective Extention of Life will be able to receive one at the very same cost as Mrs. Bush along with the same 'out of pocket' cost.
I look forward to hearing from them all in that methodology.
