In This Week’s Issue:
1. PIPC Convenes Leaders to Define Roadmap for Engaging and Empowering Patients, click here to view the press release.
2. Morning Consult: CMS Just Accelerated the Path to Value-Based Care, click here to view the article.
3. KevinMD: The Challenge in Following Evidence-Based Guidelines, click here to view the article
4. PCORI Blog: Surveys Show Great Interest in Patient-Centered Clinical Research, click here to view the blog post.
5. Study: How Comparative Effectiveness Research Is Viewed and Used by Policymakers, click here to view the blog post.
6. Draft House Bill Would Eliminate AHRQ, Cut PCORI, CMMI Funding, click here to view the article.
7. Blog: The Patient Voice Comes to BIO, click here to view the blog post.
1. PIPC Convenes Leaders to Define Roadmap for Engaging and Empowering Patients, click here to view the press release.
2. Morning Consult: CMS Just Accelerated the Path to Value-Based Care, click here to view the article.
3. KevinMD: The Challenge in Following Evidence-Based Guidelines, click here to view the article
4. PCORI Blog: Surveys Show Great Interest in Patient-Centered Clinical Research, click here to view the blog post.
5. Study: How Comparative Effectiveness Research Is Viewed and Used by Policymakers, click here to view the blog post.
6. Draft House Bill Would Eliminate AHRQ, Cut PCORI, CMMI Funding, click here to view the article.
7. Blog: The Patient Voice Comes to BIO, click here to view the blog post.
1. PIPC Convenes Leaders to Define Roadmap for Engaging and Empowering Patients
Last week, the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) today released a detailed summary and recommendations from an expert roundtable it convened April 15 of this year to explore strategies for engaging and empowering patients in care delivery. Convened by PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho, the roundtable consisted of 17 thought-leaders in the area of patient engagement and activation, all of whom shared their concerns about the existing health care infrastructure for meaningful patient and beneficiary engagement, and provided ideas for improvement.
According to PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho, “Great things can happen when you get a group of such talented and passionate individuals together in one place.” He continued, “We have a great opportunity in front of us to spur patient-centeredness and patient engagement via ‘value-based’ care, but to achieve this we need to pay for the care that patients value.”
“By acting on these recommendations, policymakers will more effectively drive organizations to change their behavior and culture related to engagement, similar to the change in culture for research being advanced by PCORI. These recommendations make clear that there are opportunities to advance patient engagement both in the processes by which new payment models are developed for public programs, and the form that they take.”
The panel recommended specific approaches for policymakers to take actions, including steps to:
Increase readiness among patients, beneficiaries and communities to engage.Measure outcomes that matter to patients.Provide transparency to the patient about the policies and incentives that drive their treatment choices.Create a coordinating council of HHS agencies to share their experience with patient and beneficiary engagement. Increase accountability for beneficiary engagement in accountable care organizations and other alternative payment models.
Click here to view the full press release.
2. Morning Consult: CMS Just Accelerated the Path to Value-Based Care
As reported in Morning Consult last week, “Health systems committed to moving to value-based care got some good news last week with CMS’ release of the Final Rule for the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) for Accountable Care Organizations, or ACOs. CMS and private payers have been explicit about their plans to migrate away from fee-for-service and toward outcomes-based payment models that hold providers accountable for the cost, quality, and experience of patient care… Medicare's sheer size demands that any forward-leaning health system seriously consider its value-based offerings; original Medicare is expected to account for nearly 40 percent of the growth in the insured population over the next ten years. Achieving scale through a Medicare ACO will be critical to helping health systems spread fixed costs more broadly, gain more traction with physicians to drive meaningful change in practice patterns, and broaden their impact on the community's health.” Click here to view the article.
3. KevinMD: The Challenge in Following Evidence-Based Guidelines
Dr. Karen Sibert comments on KevinMD.com, “Can clinical practice guidelines protect us? We are all beset by the proliferating standards and guidelines of evidence-based medicine. It’s comforting to think that a court may consider adherence to a legitimate clinical practice guideline (CPG) as evidence of reasonable prudence and acceptable practice. At the same time, physicians know that guidelines are imperfect… Though the evidence may be flawed, evidence-based medicine has shown an alarming tendency to evolve from guidelines into inflexible rules, especially if payment is linked to them. Physicians may come under pressure from regulators and hospital administrators to apply these rules mechanically, with inadequate attention to context or to a patient's other health issues.” Click here to view the article.
4. PCORI Blog: Surveys Show Great Interest in Patient-Centered Clinical Research
In a new post on The PCORI Blog, PCORI’s Laura Forsythe, PhD, MPH and Lori Frank, PhD comment, “To best achieve our goal of supporting comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) that helps patients and those who care for them make better-informed healthcare decisions, we obtain input from various end users of CER research...We were pleased to update the PCORI Board of Governors and the public today on one of the ways we solicit that information—surveys of patients, caregivers, and clinicians. A key finding from the surveys was that patients, caregivers, and clinicians were generally not familiar with the term comparative effectiveness research (CER), but once they saw its definition, they were enthusiastic about CER's potential to help them make decisions about healthcare options.” Click here to view the blog post.
5. Study: How Comparative Effectiveness Research Is Viewed and Used by Policymakers
A new post on the AcademyHealth Blog discusses a new study examining how comparative effectiveness research is viewed and used by policymakers: “In a study published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, [Joel Weissman and colleagues] surveyed Medicaid program medical and pharmacy directors in all states. Their overarching question: How do senior coverage policymakers view and use CER?...One thing they learned is that Medicaid policymakers love RCTs, consensus statements or guidelines from national professional societies, and systematic reviews. About 90% of them said they used evidence in these forms. About 75% said they used expert opinion, and about 60% used observational studies with external (not the plan's) own data. Less than half (45%) used observational studies based on the plan's data.” Click here to view the blog post.
6. Draft House Bill Would Eliminate AHRQ, Cut PCORI, CMMI Funding
David Raths of Healthcare Informatics reports that “the U.S. House Appropriations Committee released its draft fiscal year 2016 Labor, Health and Human Services funding bill. Although the draft bill would increase funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by 3.6 percent, it would eliminate the Health & Human Services’ Agency for Health Research on Quality (AHRQ)… A statement from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) called aspects of the draft bill troubling. It noted that termination of the $465 million AHRQ would severely impact the development of evidence-based care. One of AHRQ's areas of focus is health information technology research, and its 2016 budget request called for a total of $20 million in research grant support.” Click here to view the article.
7. Blog: The Patient Voice Comes to BIO
According to a recent blog post, “Every year, the BIO International Convention brings together the foremost minds in the biotechnology field to discuss the state of the industry and how to accelerate the innovation that improves lives around the world… This year, the first couple days of events have taken a decidedly patient-centered approach. Over the course of today's panels and breakouts, it became clear that companies aren't just talking the talk, they're ready to walk the walk. Advocacy groups, including the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network, the ALS Association, the National Health Council, the Alliance for Aging Research, and many others in the audience, joined the conversation to share their ideas on how we can create a more consistent, predictable approach to bring the patient voice to medical discovery, regulatory decisions, the value discussion, and policy decisions… With continued conversations on the Hill about the 21st Century Cures Act and negotiations for PDUFA VI coming up quickly, it’s clear that we need all stakeholders to come together to pave the way forward for truly patient-focused drug development.” Click here to view the blog post.
Last week, the Partnership to Improve Patient Care (PIPC) today released a detailed summary and recommendations from an expert roundtable it convened April 15 of this year to explore strategies for engaging and empowering patients in care delivery. Convened by PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho, the roundtable consisted of 17 thought-leaders in the area of patient engagement and activation, all of whom shared their concerns about the existing health care infrastructure for meaningful patient and beneficiary engagement, and provided ideas for improvement.
According to PIPC Chairman Tony Coelho, “Great things can happen when you get a group of such talented and passionate individuals together in one place.” He continued, “We have a great opportunity in front of us to spur patient-centeredness and patient engagement via ‘value-based’ care, but to achieve this we need to pay for the care that patients value.”
“By acting on these recommendations, policymakers will more effectively drive organizations to change their behavior and culture related to engagement, similar to the change in culture for research being advanced by PCORI. These recommendations make clear that there are opportunities to advance patient engagement both in the processes by which new payment models are developed for public programs, and the form that they take.”
The panel recommended specific approaches for policymakers to take actions, including steps to:
Increase readiness among patients, beneficiaries and communities to engage.Measure outcomes that matter to patients.Provide transparency to the patient about the policies and incentives that drive their treatment choices.Create a coordinating council of HHS agencies to share their experience with patient and beneficiary engagement. Increase accountability for beneficiary engagement in accountable care organizations and other alternative payment models.
Click here to view the full press release.
2. Morning Consult: CMS Just Accelerated the Path to Value-Based Care
As reported in Morning Consult last week, “Health systems committed to moving to value-based care got some good news last week with CMS’ release of the Final Rule for the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) for Accountable Care Organizations, or ACOs. CMS and private payers have been explicit about their plans to migrate away from fee-for-service and toward outcomes-based payment models that hold providers accountable for the cost, quality, and experience of patient care… Medicare's sheer size demands that any forward-leaning health system seriously consider its value-based offerings; original Medicare is expected to account for nearly 40 percent of the growth in the insured population over the next ten years. Achieving scale through a Medicare ACO will be critical to helping health systems spread fixed costs more broadly, gain more traction with physicians to drive meaningful change in practice patterns, and broaden their impact on the community's health.” Click here to view the article.
3. KevinMD: The Challenge in Following Evidence-Based Guidelines
Dr. Karen Sibert comments on KevinMD.com, “Can clinical practice guidelines protect us? We are all beset by the proliferating standards and guidelines of evidence-based medicine. It’s comforting to think that a court may consider adherence to a legitimate clinical practice guideline (CPG) as evidence of reasonable prudence and acceptable practice. At the same time, physicians know that guidelines are imperfect… Though the evidence may be flawed, evidence-based medicine has shown an alarming tendency to evolve from guidelines into inflexible rules, especially if payment is linked to them. Physicians may come under pressure from regulators and hospital administrators to apply these rules mechanically, with inadequate attention to context or to a patient's other health issues.” Click here to view the article.
4. PCORI Blog: Surveys Show Great Interest in Patient-Centered Clinical Research
In a new post on The PCORI Blog, PCORI’s Laura Forsythe, PhD, MPH and Lori Frank, PhD comment, “To best achieve our goal of supporting comparative clinical effectiveness research (CER) that helps patients and those who care for them make better-informed healthcare decisions, we obtain input from various end users of CER research...We were pleased to update the PCORI Board of Governors and the public today on one of the ways we solicit that information—surveys of patients, caregivers, and clinicians. A key finding from the surveys was that patients, caregivers, and clinicians were generally not familiar with the term comparative effectiveness research (CER), but once they saw its definition, they were enthusiastic about CER's potential to help them make decisions about healthcare options.” Click here to view the blog post.
5. Study: How Comparative Effectiveness Research Is Viewed and Used by Policymakers
A new post on the AcademyHealth Blog discusses a new study examining how comparative effectiveness research is viewed and used by policymakers: “In a study published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, [Joel Weissman and colleagues] surveyed Medicaid program medical and pharmacy directors in all states. Their overarching question: How do senior coverage policymakers view and use CER?...One thing they learned is that Medicaid policymakers love RCTs, consensus statements or guidelines from national professional societies, and systematic reviews. About 90% of them said they used evidence in these forms. About 75% said they used expert opinion, and about 60% used observational studies with external (not the plan's) own data. Less than half (45%) used observational studies based on the plan's data.” Click here to view the blog post.
6. Draft House Bill Would Eliminate AHRQ, Cut PCORI, CMMI Funding
David Raths of Healthcare Informatics reports that “the U.S. House Appropriations Committee released its draft fiscal year 2016 Labor, Health and Human Services funding bill. Although the draft bill would increase funding for the National Institutes of Health (NIH) by 3.6 percent, it would eliminate the Health & Human Services’ Agency for Health Research on Quality (AHRQ)… A statement from the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC) called aspects of the draft bill troubling. It noted that termination of the $465 million AHRQ would severely impact the development of evidence-based care. One of AHRQ's areas of focus is health information technology research, and its 2016 budget request called for a total of $20 million in research grant support.” Click here to view the article.
7. Blog: The Patient Voice Comes to BIO
According to a recent blog post, “Every year, the BIO International Convention brings together the foremost minds in the biotechnology field to discuss the state of the industry and how to accelerate the innovation that improves lives around the world… This year, the first couple days of events have taken a decidedly patient-centered approach. Over the course of today's panels and breakouts, it became clear that companies aren't just talking the talk, they're ready to walk the walk. Advocacy groups, including the Pancreatic Cancer Action Network, the ALS Association, the National Health Council, the Alliance for Aging Research, and many others in the audience, joined the conversation to share their ideas on how we can create a more consistent, predictable approach to bring the patient voice to medical discovery, regulatory decisions, the value discussion, and policy decisions… With continued conversations on the Hill about the 21st Century Cures Act and negotiations for PDUFA VI coming up quickly, it’s clear that we need all stakeholders to come together to pave the way forward for truly patient-focused drug development.” Click here to view the blog post.
