Several days ago, BusinessWeek’s Chad Terhune and Arlene Weintraub argued in an online article that when it comes to “so-called disease management, [there’s] scant evidence that it works.” I was surprised to read this, as when I spoke to Terhune before he wrote the article, I provided him with a number of examples of widely-regarded published studies, including randomized controlled trials, showing that well-designed disease management programs save money and improve health. Some of these examples included:

• Transitional care programs—a major part of care management—based on the models developed at the Universities of Pennsylvania and Colorado. Randomized trials have proven these nurse-led care management functions reduce hospital readmissions by about 50%. Geisinger and other health systems have adopted these models producing substantial savings.
• The YMCA’s structured lifestyle interventions, based on the model for the national Diabetes Prevention Program, which have shown a 58% reduction in the incidence of diabetes and cost savings within two to three years.
• By investing $30 billion over 10 years in a community health team infrastructure, we could save $100 billion over 10 years due to reductions in hospital admissions, readmissions and improving existing care management protocols.
• A new Health Affairs study by Baicker, Cutler and Song that found that “medical costs fall by about $3.27 for every dollar spent on wellness programs and that absenteeism costs fall by about $2.73 for every dollar spent.” This is one of several published studies showing similar results.

The bottom line is that Terhune and Weintraub ignored a large body of published data that contradicted their argument. For instance, they focused on shortcomings in GE’s disease management program, but failed to mention Johnson & Johnson’s workplace wellness program, which is one of the longest-running programs in the country.  A 2002 Rand study found that J&J’s disease management and prevention initiatives not only improved employee health, but also saved employees an average of $225 per year because of a reduced need for doctor visits.

Terhune and Weintraub also failed to discuss why disease management and prevention have garnered such popularity, especially among policymakers. Policymakers — on both the left and the right — have rightly recognized that much of the cause of our nation’s poor health lies in a misaligned delivery system in which Americans, insured or otherwise, aren’t getting the right type of care to stay healthy and avoid disease. In the United States today:

• Patients with chronic disease are estimated to account for 75% of overall health spending and 99% of Medicare spending.
• More than half of Medicare beneficiaries are treated for five or more chronic conditions yearly.
• Two in three American adults are obese or overweight, and by 2018, 103 million American adults — or 43 percent of the population — will be considered obese.
• Obesity is historically linked to about one third of the increase in domestic health spending since the mid-1980s.

Disease management isn’t the sole solution to these problems. However, it’s a necessary part of the solution – and one that is, contrary to the BusinessWeek article, backed by evidence.