[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
December 28, 1994

The Cost-Quality RelationshipDo We Always Get What We Pay For?

Author Affiliations

From the Center for Health Studies, Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound, Seattle, Wash.

JAMA. 1994;272(24):1951-1952. doi:10.1001/jama.1994.03520240079046

The relationship between cost and quality is more than an academic concern. Assumptions about the strength and direction of the association are at the heart of the current debate about the future direction of American health care. If we assume that quality and costs are positively related, then it follows that efforts to contain costs threaten quality.1 If we assume a less linear or even negative relationship, then cost containment and quality improvement may even be complementary.2

See also p 1903.

Donabedian et al3 suggest that the use of health services beyond those needed for maximum health benefit might actually have a negative effect because of complications of the unnecessary tests and treatments. Empirical studies of the cost-quality relationship have been largely confined to hospital care and show no consistency in the direction of the associations.4 The article by Starfield et al5 in this issue

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview