July 1st, 2009

Reports the New York Times:

An influential scientific advisory panel has recommended that federal officials give top priority to comparing the effectiveness of competing medical strategies in areas that include treating prostate cancer, reducing hospital infections and lowering the rate of unwanted pregnancies.

In a highly anticipated report, released Tuesday morning, a panel assembled by the Institute of Medicine released a list of 100 health topics that it said should get high priority as the Obama administration proceeded with a plan to spend $1.1 billion in comparing the effectiveness of competing drugs, medical devices, operations and other treatments for specific health conditions.

The report is one of the first concrete steps in a broad effort by administration officials and health experts to shift the focus of medical practice toward scientific evidence — rather than a physician’s personal views or treatments promoted by medical product companies.

Currently, though, in many areas of medicine there is scant data that compare competing strategies. And systems for gathering such data by mining hospital or insurance industry records are also very limited.

…

Supporters of comparative effectiveness reviews include many medical researchers, consumer groups, unions and insurers. They say such studies are essential to curbing the widespread use of ineffective treatments and to helping control health care costs, which totaled $2.2 trillion in 2007, or 16 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product.

But the effort has come under attack by critics, including some conservative commentators and medical products companies, who warn that the process could lead to inadequate treatment for some patients and even the rationing of health care.

Find out more at the NYT.