For anyone who has had to wait a long time to schedule a medical appointment

游客2024-05-01  4

问题     For anyone who has had to wait a long time to schedule a medical appointment, it might seem as if the world needs more doctors, and that training more of them would be a good idea. An amendment that teaching hospitals are pushing to include in the health care legislation would do just that. It would add 15, 000 medical residency slots to the 100, 000 residencies(住院医生实习)the federal government now finances, most of them through Medicare.
    This amendment is being heavily promoted by several doctor specialty societies. But that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. It would raise Medicare’s bill for residencies, which is already $ 9 billion a year. More important, since the cost of health care follows the supply of doctors, the added slots would substantially increase the national health care bill. And the measure would not address the underlying reason that patients are forced to wait to see doctors.
    Over the past 20 years, the number of doctors in relation to the American population has risen by 30%. Yet in many parts of the country, more doctors has simply meant more doctors, not better access for patients, not better communication among a patient’s health care providers, and not better results. The truth is that regions with the higher number of doctors per capita(人均)tend to deliver lower quality care at a higher cost.
    Increasing the number of doctors would make our health care system worse, not better, because the United States doesn’t actually need more doctors. What we do need instantly is for primary care to reclaim its central role in the delivery of medicine, to provide the preventive care, chronic disease management and coordination of services that is lacking in so many parts of the country. Primary care doctors can help patients avoid unnecessary visits to specialists, hospitals and emergency rooms, thus lowering health care costs. Our present national problem is that primary care doctors are leaving their practices in droves, driven out by their low pay, long hours and mountains of paperwork. Some of them go to work in emergency rooms or hospitals, others become specialists, and many simply abandon medicine.
    Before adding residency slots, Congress should demand that academic medical centers come up with a plan to improve the disorganized, fragmented care that plagues much of the country. Insurers and Medicare should pay family-practice doctors and general internists enough to keep them in the field. And federal financing for medical education programs should hinge on their plans to train more primary care doctors and fewer specialists.
    Otherwise, we’ll simply end up perpetuating a system in which too many doctors provide poor-quality care at too high a price.  [br] Why does the author not regard the amendment as a good idea?

选项 A、It couldn’t be accepted by the health care legislation.
B、It could not reduce the national health care bill greatly.
C、It lacks support from doctor specialty societies.
D、It would bump up health care expenses.

答案 D

解析 根据题干关键词amendment,not,good idea定位到原文第二段倒数第二句:More important,since thecost of health care follows the supply of doctors,the added slots would substantially increase the national healthcare bill.可知,作者不看好该修正案的原因是因为该修正案会极大地增加国家的医疗开支。故选D)项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3578731.html
最新回复(0)