What does cake and ice cream have to do with margins?

We now know what opportunity costs are and how that shows us our potential losses based on what could have been. And while that tells us where our money should go, there are still other factors to consider such as Margins and their costs and benefits.

Margins can be thought of as the next unit or a theoretical border. And Marginal Change is basically how change affects this “border” – either positively or negatively. So when weighing up decisions in healthcare, we look at marginal benefits and costs.

Marginal benefits = the benefit of one more unit of output
Marginal costs = the cost of one more unit of output

And because I like silly anecdotes to help me remember things. I think of my friend who was very worried about fitting into her wedding dress. So if the marginal benefit of having a slice of cake is greater than the marginal costs, she proceeds to have a slice of cake – cause it is delicious! However, let us pretend that having that one slice of cake will mean she will no longer fit into her wedding dress and she does not have time to get it altered for the wedding. Then we could say here that the marginal costs outweigh the benefit of having that yummy slice of cake, so she decides she is not going to have it – cause although it is yummy, her wedding will be ruined because she won’t have a dress to wear.

What is this I hear about the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility?

I think it is important to note that Utility here refers to satisfaction or happiness gained by the recipient.

That is a pretty interesting phenomenon. You know when you decide to dig into a pint of Ben & Jerry’s and that first mouthful is the best feeling in the world? But then you have more and more, and by the end of it you feel sick cause you are lactose intolerant and realise that it was a terrible idea to eat the whole pint of ice cream. (Or is this just me?) Now that is diminishing marginal utility – cause each extra unit of input yields less and less additional output/benefit. Essentially the benefit or the good diminishes as the consumption of it increases.

So, how does this work in healthcare.

Well marginal analysis – understanding the costs, benefits and diminishing marginal utility help us get the most bang for our buck really. It lets us know how well an intervention/screening programme or service is run as well as if it is worth investing more or further in it.

It also tells us when resources should be moved from programmes producing less
marginal benefit per unit of cost to programmes producing more, as then the total benefit from the resources will increase.

The million dollar question is – Will spending more on healthcare truly show a benefit or are we going to experience the law of diminishing utility, where more money is pumped into healthcare but quality of life and overall satisfaction stagnates. Could the same additional funds instead be allocated to education or housing with better utility?

While I still do not know the answer to that question, I would love to hear your take on it.


Opportunity costs

In Disease Detectives, I talked about the utilisation of limited resources.

So the question is what factors come into play when making decisions about what are the best possible interventions/actions we should take.

Opportunity costs is one of those factors.

In healthcare our main issues are

  1. How do we get the best outcomes
  2. How do we reach the most amount of people
  3. How do we keep costs low or within the scope of the resources available

And this of course means we always have to make choices, and opportunity costs is one of the guiding factors in this decision making process. So what is opportunity costs?

It is basically the potential good outcome that is lost by the utilisation of resources or efforts in another area/intervention.

What on earth does this even mean?

The easiest way I understand this is in terms of hospital beds (in wards) and primary health care centres (outpatient/GPs).

So let us say we figure out that if one person is admitted in hospital, the same amount of funds could have been allocated to treating 15 people in a GP setting. So this is an opportunity cost because by having that one bed/admission, we lose the funds to treat 15 people in an outpatient setting.

And if I relate it to paediatrics, for every child admitted to ward requiring their parents to take time off work – that time spent in the hospital with one child also means a missed activity with other family/children or even wages lost .

Why is this important?

Because it shows us that requiring admission for treatment really should be a last resort and that it would be more cost effective if we could reduce the number of admissions.

So the next question is how do we figure out which is the best way to do that?