from a system cost perspective, absolutely. For specific beneficiaries, not so much, especially after they have aged out of paying into the system. This is a textbook challenge with the US healthcare economy.
Not just from a cost perspective: overuse of imaging, particularly in orthopedic medicine, is apparently a major driver of iatrogenesis in American medicine. It actively does harm.
I don't think the term "elective medicine" means anything useful in this conversation. But, yes: I'm referring to unnecessary surgeries consequent to MRI; a big problem, especially for stuff like knees and spines.
eh, If I have elected to undergo a procedure, I would want the best and most imaging possible.
I dont see data as the problem, but the decision making around it. Preventing the generation of data may be a solution, but I dont care for it as a strategy.
"Elective" medicine is simply medicine that can be scheduled in advance. The opposite of "elective" is "emergency". Plenty of elective procedures are not in any meaningful sense optional.
I feel we are quibbling about terminology instead of the central point. Feel free to substitute discretionary procedures if that is clearer, although nearly all medicine is discretionary (elective or emergency).