Organ transplantation and the inevitable debate as to what constitutes a basic health care benefit

The need for health care reform is an economic reality. The urgency with which it must be pursued is apparent. The direction it will take is clear. The implications it has for transplantation are ambiguous. Managed competition will take time to implement, but managed care is here now and will surely become more prevalent. Thus, it is timely to examine the future of transplantation from the perspective of managed care. Foremost among our concerns is just how transplantation will factor into the debate as to what constitutes a basic health care benefits package. The National Cooperative Transplantation Study (NCTS) was undertaken to address a variety of clinical, economic, social, ethical, and quality-of-care issues. Based on a random sample of all transplants performed in the United States in 1988, individual assessments were made of charges for kidney, heart, liver, heart-lung, and pancreas transplantation. Insurance coverage and reimbursement policies and practices were also analyzed. In 1988 dollars Medicare procedure charges from date of transplant through date of initial discharge were as follows: kidney, $39,625; heart, $91,570; liver, $145,795; heart-lung, $134,881; and pancreas, $66,917. Both patient charges and outcomes were adversely affected by the patient's status prior to surgery, and by the need for retransplantation. The associations among transplant program activity, procedure charges, and patient outcomes varied. While insurance coverage for transplantation has steadily improved, hospital reimbursement is often well below billed charges, as a result, access for some patients may be limited. Organ transplantation is often criticized as too costly, given other health care needs. A recent report indicates that the total first-year charges for transplantation continue to increase. Estimated charges in 1993 dollars are as follows: kidney, $87,700; heart, $209,100; liver, $302,900; heart-lung, $246,000; pancreas, $65,000; and lung, $243,600. Although expensive, transplantation can be equally if not more cost-effective than other accepted therapeutic approaches for the treatment of catastrophic disease. Nonetheless, under managed care and capitated payment it will be essential that the high cost of transplantation be addressed. To reduce charges, enhance patient outcomes, and improve access patient selection policies must be reconsidered. Currently, those patients who are least likely to benefit, yet whose treatment cost the most, are given priority for transplantation. While this approach may be clinically indicated, it is socially unacceptable. Managed care and managed competition will force physicians and surgeons to adopt a more conservative and cost-efficient practice style. The patients who stand to benefit most are those whose needs are consistent with the principles of cost effectiveness.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)