Using Comparative Effectiveness Research To Examine And Improve Health Care Reform
- Date: 2010-09-10 - Word Count: 651
Share This!
Our understanding of the effectiveness of healthcare interventions continues to grow - in particular, our understanding of the impact of such interventions on individuals with mental illness and substance use disorders is becoming more robust. And yet, research evidence indicates that the realities of care delivery don't always parallel established clinical guidelines. In the light of state budget cuts and other financial considerations, efforts are underway to realign direct care practices and clinical guidelines as one of several means to control healthcare costs and improve overall quality of care.
For the first time, significant amounts of money are being allocated to the federal government to evaluate the effectiveness of our nation's healthcare. The economic stimulus bill approved by the U.S. Congress in February, 2009 provides $700 million to federal agencies to conduct or support Comparative Effectiveness Research. Congress characterizes CER as research that compares the clinical outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of items, services, and procedures that are used to prevent, diagnose, or treat diseases, disorders and other health conditions.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act establishes an independent CER entity, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute. CER is being embraced by public and private healthcare stakeholders as a leading solution to rising healthcare costs, poor quality, and safety concerns.
Despite this recognition, many healthcare stakeholders remain apprehensive about the impact of CER. In fact, while the national healthcare reform bill creates a new federal CER entity, it does not authorize its findings to be used to make decisions about the coverage or reimbursement of services. Clinical guidelines reinforced by financial incentives might become coercive tools, curtail treatment choice, and undermine recovery for a group of clients with very complex, co-morbid mental and physical health conditions.
A recent study in a major health publication reveals that the general public may value other considerations - for example, recommendations from family and friends - more highly than findings from CER. Such subjective value judgments are at odds with the underpinnings of CER; clearly, additional efforts must be undertaken to achieve consumer buy-in of the value of CER in their decision-making process.
Healthcare advocates are calling for clear language that would prevent the use of CER to deny healthcare recipients needed treatments and therapies. Evidence should drive quality decision-making by the provider and the client. Cost is a factor after determining options most appropriate to the individual. CER should support individualized care and not dictate "one-size fits-all" treatment.
As bipartisan congressional action continues to shape how value and quality are defined in healthcare, there are clear action steps that researchers and providers need to take:
- Encourage Congress and the federal government to further examine important issues, such as population versus individual applications of evidence-based medicine, accountability in generating evidence used by policymakers, and accurate communication of evidence gaps and uncertainties. CER must consider a wide array of evidence that includes observational studies, disease registry data, and expert opinions drawn from clinical guidelines.
- As federal agencies develop their research agenda, it's imperative that providers engage in the development, translation, and dissemination of research findings into policy and practice. The application of research findings within complex healthcare systems requires increased interaction between researchers and users to show a way for adaption and implementation of research results.
- Examine how we effectively translate research into everyday public health policies and programs. Previous efforts to accelerate the translation of research into practice often fail to characterize the knowledge gap between evidence-based interventions and effective delivery and adoption by diverse healthcare delivery systems. We must be diligent in articulating the need to support practice- based research in conjunction with dissemination of comparative research.
Any CER efforts must be publicly accountable. All stakeholders, including clients and providers, can play an active role in the entire research process from setting research priorities to disseminating research results. Greater focus is needed for identifying the best methods to include clients in translating, disseminating, and implementing evidence to ensure that research is useful for policymaking.
For the first time, significant amounts of money are being allocated to the federal government to evaluate the effectiveness of our nation's healthcare. The economic stimulus bill approved by the U.S. Congress in February, 2009 provides $700 million to federal agencies to conduct or support Comparative Effectiveness Research. Congress characterizes CER as research that compares the clinical outcomes, effectiveness, and appropriateness of items, services, and procedures that are used to prevent, diagnose, or treat diseases, disorders and other health conditions.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act establishes an independent CER entity, the Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute. CER is being embraced by public and private healthcare stakeholders as a leading solution to rising healthcare costs, poor quality, and safety concerns.
Despite this recognition, many healthcare stakeholders remain apprehensive about the impact of CER. In fact, while the national healthcare reform bill creates a new federal CER entity, it does not authorize its findings to be used to make decisions about the coverage or reimbursement of services. Clinical guidelines reinforced by financial incentives might become coercive tools, curtail treatment choice, and undermine recovery for a group of clients with very complex, co-morbid mental and physical health conditions.
A recent study in a major health publication reveals that the general public may value other considerations - for example, recommendations from family and friends - more highly than findings from CER. Such subjective value judgments are at odds with the underpinnings of CER; clearly, additional efforts must be undertaken to achieve consumer buy-in of the value of CER in their decision-making process.
Healthcare advocates are calling for clear language that would prevent the use of CER to deny healthcare recipients needed treatments and therapies. Evidence should drive quality decision-making by the provider and the client. Cost is a factor after determining options most appropriate to the individual. CER should support individualized care and not dictate "one-size fits-all" treatment.
As bipartisan congressional action continues to shape how value and quality are defined in healthcare, there are clear action steps that researchers and providers need to take:
- Encourage Congress and the federal government to further examine important issues, such as population versus individual applications of evidence-based medicine, accountability in generating evidence used by policymakers, and accurate communication of evidence gaps and uncertainties. CER must consider a wide array of evidence that includes observational studies, disease registry data, and expert opinions drawn from clinical guidelines.
- As federal agencies develop their research agenda, it's imperative that providers engage in the development, translation, and dissemination of research findings into policy and practice. The application of research findings within complex healthcare systems requires increased interaction between researchers and users to show a way for adaption and implementation of research results.
- Examine how we effectively translate research into everyday public health policies and programs. Previous efforts to accelerate the translation of research into practice often fail to characterize the knowledge gap between evidence-based interventions and effective delivery and adoption by diverse healthcare delivery systems. We must be diligent in articulating the need to support practice- based research in conjunction with dissemination of comparative research.
Any CER efforts must be publicly accountable. All stakeholders, including clients and providers, can play an active role in the entire research process from setting research priorities to disseminating research results. Greater focus is needed for identifying the best methods to include clients in translating, disseminating, and implementing evidence to ensure that research is useful for policymaking.
Related Tags: health care, mental health, healthcare reform, mental healthcare, health reform, mental health policy
Your Article Search Directory : Find in Articles
Recent articles in this category:
- When Did The Term "racist" Turn Into A Political Tactic?
I had always thought that being a racist was a bad thing. The dictionary defines a racist as someone - Best Choice For You And Me - Palin, Tea And The Gop
Tea Party backed Christine O'Donnell's spectacular win in Delaware combined with others around the n - The International Response To Plastic Bags
Americans overwhelmingly choose plastic. Per year they use around 90 million plastic versus 5 billio - Landslides' Avalanche Of Mud.
When China observed a day of mourning on 15th August 2010 for the victims of the previous week's dea - The Fed's Role In Crisis And Recovery
Despite its apolitical mandate, the Federal Reserve remains one of the most politically sensitive in - Relocation Of 330,000 Residents Begins In Central China
In the country's largest relocation program since the Three Gorges Dam, China has ordered over 330,0 - China Launches Global English News Channel
The Chinese government owned news agency - Xinhua has started broadcasting events happening in China - After Hitting Record Lows Mortgage Rates Fall Again
The 30 year rate dropped this week from 4.69 to 4.58. This is quite a large drop for a week. What ma - U.n. Report: India And China Massively Improving Slums
China and India have improved the lives of more slum dwellers than any other country, the United Nat - Whale's Killing Should Be Punished By Imposing Rules.
Whaling has plagued the oceans for centuries and although it has always had some impact on the ecosy
Most viewed articles in this category:
- Campaign Time Again
Politicians are everywhere once more. They're on television, radio, billboards, the Internet and on - Salman Rushdie The Sensitive Prophet And Juma Gul
Between Danish cartoons and Rushdie's "Satanic Verses" that have raised the ire of Muslims worldwide - The Fight For La'au Point
There is a battle between the largest private landowner of Moloka'i (the Moloka'i Ranch) and the nat - Is Charles, The Prince Of Wales, Fit To Be King?
Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor named at his birth on the 14th of November 1948. Charles, the e - The Web And The 2008 Presidential Race
A lot of people have expressed that there is too much buzz on the upcoming 2008 presidential race. T - The Theory Of Globalization And Its Analysis
There has been considerable academic debate concerning the emergence and meaning of globalisation wi - High Fives To The Modern Day Colonists
The colonists from the 1700's would be giving the modern day colonists high fives for their spirit a - Isn't Your Job Mindset Suffocating You, Your Dreams, And Your Goals?
The chains of the corporate mindset holds people back from stepping forward and completely creating - Book On Bihar
There is one thing that I really despise - is the fact that people do raise eyebrows when you utter - End Of The World 12 21 2012
Can you imagine in 999 A.D. how many predictions that the world would come to an end there might be?