No, you miss the point. It is indeed to do what is best for the patient, but given imperfect knowledge and the human bodies ability to heal itself, then it may often be the wisest course for the physician to do nothing that has a possibility of doing harm.It seems you miss the point of the Hippocratic Oath. The point isn't to not do what is best for the patient. The point is that in the absence of a good reason to do "something", doing nothing is the best choice.
Doing no harm is more important than doing "something".
All of which has at best an imperfect parallel to economics and the US health system; that mismatch is not improved by repeating 'Hippocratic Oath'.