On Fri, 20 Jul 2001, Dan Minette wrote:
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >Medicine is really not about curing disease (we don't really
> >fight wars against cancer or AIDS or anything else - If we did we would
> >lose every one). It is about prolonging life. Let us look at
> >treatments that. Now I know how much it costs to diagnose a stroke in
> >the period of time necessary for effective treatment (< 3hours)
> >and the cost of those treatments. Probably about 25-50k per
> >stroke. In the past there was no treatment so no rush to the hospital no
> >CT no fancy MR with Dr. Zimmy looking at your images on the computer
> >the hospital installed in his home (complete with DSL). So stroke
> >treatment in the future (and heart attack treatment in the present) can
> >never be cost effective.
>
> Well, I'm not sure about strokes, so let me ask a question. Is the
> treatment considered a success when the person lives, but needs to be
> on a respirator, cannot recognize loved ones, afterwards? I know that
> people who survive heart attacks can decide to live healthier lives
> and last another 20 years. What is the 1 year survival rate for a
> successful stroke treatment? If the 2 month survival rate is > 50%,
> then this treatment would actually decrease the fraction of money
> spent in the last 8 weeks of life.
I know of one stroke case like this from personal experience -- my
husband's grandfather had a stroke and got immediate medical attention. A
week later, he was OK to go home, in theory, but since he was at risk of
having another stroke and wasn't in the *greatest* shape, his daughters
decided to find a good assisted living/nursing home arrangement for him,
and he lived at least another 5 months. (I don't remember how long,
exactly, since I don't remember just when it was he had the stroke, but I
know that it was at *least* 5 months before his death, and may have been
more than a year. It was, however, at most 18 months, but what do you
expect when someone is into their 90s?.)
Julia
