Insurer Rewards Push Women Toward Mammograms
By: Harald Schmidt (NY Times) January 2016
A 53-year-old woman on Medicaid in Washington State who has never had a mammogram elects to get one in return for a $15 gift card.
A 35-year-old woman in Florida chooses to get her first mammogram because her insurer, Aetna, offers a $50 payroll check.
In Iowa, a 46-year-old woman who has been getting mammograms every other year opts to get them annually because Wellmark Blue Cross Blue Shield will pay her $50 to do so.
All three of these women have average risk profiles, and none have family members with breast cancer. Who made the right choice?
It’s a trick question. The real question is whether employers and health plans should really be offering incentives to women to get frequent mammograms.
Women hear all the time that “mammography saves lives,” a message the American College of Radiology and various breast cancer charities have been repeating for years. But the advice does not apply to all women — at least it shouldn’t.
Just last week, the United States Preventive Services Task Force again recommended that women at average risk for breast cancer begin getting regular mammograms at age 50, and then every other year until age 74. The American Cancer Society recommends yearly mammography from ages 45 to 54, then screenings every other year afterward.
Other groups hew to still other positions, although all acknowledge that women must be able to choose for themselves when to start. The diversity of opinions is entirely understandable. The data is anything but clear, and that raises tough questions about whether incentives to get screened are appropriate.
We do know that regular screening reduces the chances of dying from breast cancer, but the reduction seems to be small. For all deaths averted, according to the task force, at least twice as many women will have received entirely unnecessary treatment and the anxiety that comes with it.
In truth, estimates of the benefits and harms of screening are all over the map; researchers themselves do not agree on the facts.
Categories
- Benefits Resources
- Bonding
- BOP
- Business Insurance
- Commercial Auto
- Commercial Property
- Company News
- Construction
- Crime Insurance
- Cyber Insurance
- Directors & Officers
- Employee Benefits
- Employment Practice Liability Insurance
- Entertainment
- General Liability
- Health Insurance
- Healthcare
- Healthcare Reform
- Homeowners Insurance
- Hospitality
- Manufacturing
- Medical Malpractice
- Mining & Energy
- Nightclubs
- Personal Auto
- Personal Insurance
- Professional
- Restaurants
- Retail & Wholesale
- Risk Management Resources
- Safety Topics
- SBA Bonds
- Security
- Seminars
- Technology
- Tourism
- Transportation
- Uncategorized
- Workers Compensation
Archives
- May 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- September 2020
- August 2020
- July 2020
- June 2020
- May 2020
- November 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- May 2018
- April 2018
- March 2018
- February 2018
- January 2018
- December 2017
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- January 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- October 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- February 2013
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- March 2011
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- April 2010
- February 2010
- November 2009
- October 2009
- November 2008
- August 2008