PEDIATRICS Vol. 96 No. 5 November 1995, pp. A62
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by L., J. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by L., J. F.

DISEASE AND WELLNESS MANAGEMENT FIRMS!?

J. F. L. MD

In 1993 Eli Lilly publicly announced that it was turning itself from a drug firm into a "disease-management" one. The idea is that rather than focusing a company on a specific part of the health-care market, such as drugs or hospitals, a firm should deal with all aspects of a disease. Chronic diseases that require lots of attention could produce the biggest savings (and hence profits). Eli Lilly has launched five disease-management programmes, for asthma, pulmonary disease, depression, diabetes, and ulcers. Several small firms are already thriving in "disease management"...

The "wellness-management" school is led by KPMG and Andersen Consulting. They believe that the disease-management approach fails in several respects. Health care involves maintaining health as well as treating diseases; patients often suffer from several diseases, which cannot easily be isolated and managed separately; and "disease-management" is an unappealing notion for companies that want to associate themselves with health, not illness.

Instead, companies that promote "wellness" should organize their product portfolios around groups of patients, trying to deal with all their medical needs. Some drug firms are doing this.