The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Waste in the US Health Care System: Estimated Costs and Potential for Savings
Abstract
Importance: The United States spends more on health care than any other country, with costs approaching 18% of the gross domestic product (GDP). Prior studies estimated that approximately 30% of health care spending may be considered waste. Despite efforts to reduce overtreatment, improve care, and address overpayment, it is likely that substantial waste in US health care spending remains. Objectives: To estimate current levels of waste in the US health care system in 6 previously developed domains and to report estimates of potential savings for each domain. Evidence: A search of peer-reviewed and "gray" literature from January 2012 to May 2019 focused on the 6 waste domains previously identified by the Institute of Medicine and Berwick and Hackbarth: failure of care delivery, failure of care coordination, overtreatment or low-value care, pricing failure, fraud and abuse, and administrative complexity. For each domain, available estimates of waste-related costs and data from interventions shown to reduce waste-related costs were recorded, converted to annual estimates in 2019 dollars for national populations when necessary, and combined into ranges or summed as appropriate. Findings: The review yielded 71 estimates from 54 unique peer-reviewed publications, government-based reports, and reports from the gray literature. Computations yielded the following estimated ranges of total annual cost of waste: failure of care delivery, $102.4 billion to $165.7 billion; failure of care coordination, $27.2 billion to $78.2 billion; overtreatment or low-value care, $75.7 billion to $101.2 billion; pricing failure, $230.7 billion to $240.5 billion; fraud and abuse, $58.5 billion to $83.9 billion; and administrative complexity, $265.6 billion. The estimated annual savings from measures to eliminate waste were as follows: failure of care delivery, $44.4 billion to $97.3 billion; failure of care coordination, $29.6 billion to $38.2 billion; overtreatment or low-value care, $12.8 billion to $28.6 billion; pricing failure, $81.4 billion to $91.2 billion; and fraud and abuse, $22.8 billion to $30.8 billion. No studies were identified that focused on interventions targeting administrative complexity. The estimated total annual costs of waste were $760 billion to $935 billion and savings from interventions that address waste were $191 billion to $286 billion. Conclusions and Relevance: In this review based on 6 previously identified domains of health care waste, the estimated cost of waste in the US health care system ranged from $760 billion to $935 billion, accounting for approximately 25% of total health care spending, and the projected potential savings from interventions that reduce waste, excluding savings from administrative complexity, ranged from $191 billion to $286 billion, representing a potential 25% reduction in the total cost of waste. Implementation of effective measures to eliminate waste represents an opportunity reduce the continued increases in US health care expenditures.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Eliminating Waste in US Health Care
Hackbarth, A. D. (2012) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2012.362 · Cited by 1,746
Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries
Papanicolas, I., Woskie, L. R., & Jha, A. K. (2018) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2018.1150 · Cited by 1,626
The High Cost of Prescription Drugs in the United States: Origins and Prospects for Reform
Kesselheim, A. S., Avorn, J., & Sarpatwari, A. (2016) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2016.11237 · Cited by 592
The Price Ain’t Right? Hospital Prices and Health Spending on the Privately Insured*
Cooper, Z., Craig, S. V., Gaynor, M., & Van Reenen, J. (2019) · The Quarterly Journal of Economics · doi:10.1093/qje/qjy020 · Cited by 575
Measuring Low-Value Care in Medicare
Schwartz, A. L., Landon, B. E., Elshaug, A. G., Chernew, M. E., & McWilliams, J. M. (2014) · JAMA Internal Medicine · doi:10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.1541 · Cited by 489
US Physician Practices Spend More Than $15.4 Billion Annually To Report Quality Measures
Casalino, L. P., Gans, D., Weber, R., Cea, M., Tuchovsky, A., Bishop, T. F., Miranda, Y., Frankel, B. A., Ziehler, K. B., Wong, M. M., et al. (2016) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2015.1258 · Cited by 274
Choosing Wisely: Prevalence and Correlates of Low-Value Health Care Services in the United States
Colla, C. H., Morden, N. E., Sequist, T. D., Schpero, W. L., & Rosenthal, M. B. (2015) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-014-3070-z · Cited by 270
Conditions With the Largest Number of Adult Hospital Readmissions by Payer, 2011
Hines, A. L., Barrett, M. L., Jiang, H., & Steiner, C. (2014) · Cited by 181
Ahn, S., Basu, R., Smith, M. L., Jiang, L., Lorig, K., Whitelaw, N., & Ory, M. G. (2013) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/1471-2458-13-1141 · Cited by 178
Sisko, A. M., Keehan, S. P., Poisal, J. A., Cuckler, G. A., Smith, S. D., Madison, A. J., Rennie, K. E., & Hardesty, J. C. (2019) · Health Affairs · doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2018.05499 · Cited by 176
Cited by
On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models
Bommasani, R., Hudson, D. A., Adeli, E., Altman, R., Arora, S., von Arx, S., Bernstein, M. S., Bohg, J., Bosselut, A., Brunskill, E., et al. (2021) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.07258 · Cited by 2,676
The Promise of Digital Health: Then, Now, and the Future
Verily, Abernethy, A., Adams, L., National Academy of Medicine, Barrett, M., ResMed, Bechtel, C., Health, X., Brennan, P., Medicine, N. L. O., et al. (2022) · NAM Perspectives · doi:10.31478/202206e · Cited by 477
Digital interventions for the treatment of depression: a meta-analytic review
Moshe, I., Terhorst, Y., Philippi, P., Domhardt, M., Cuijpers, P., Cristea, I., Pulkki-Råback, L., Baumeister, H., & Sander, L. B. (2021) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/bul0000334 · Cited by 390
Bekbolatova, M., Mayer, J., Ong, C. W., & Toma, M. (2024) · Healthcare · doi:10.3390/healthcare12020125 · Cited by 404
Interoperability of heterogeneous health information systems: a systematic literature review
Torab-Miandoab, A., Samad-Soltani, T., Jodati, A., & Rezaei-Hachesu, P. (2023) · BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making · doi:10.1186/s12911-023-02115-5 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Shrank, W. H., Rogstad, T. L., & Parekh, N.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2019-10-15
- Volume
- 322
- Issue
- 15
- Pages
- 1501
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2979186816
- Cited by
- 1,046
- References
- 30
- FWCI
- 149.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Waste in the US Health Care System: Estimated Costs and Potential for Savings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2019.13978
- The paper
- Shrank, W. H., Rogstad, T. L., & Parekh, N. (2019). Waste in the US Health Care System: Estimated Costs and Potential for Savings. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2019.13978
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.