Medical Treatments: Issues and Options for an Term Paper

Medical Treatments: Issues and Options for an Expanded Federal Role" Using Bardach's Eightfold Path"

The objective of this work in writing is to assess the work entitled "Research on the Comparative Effectiveness of Medical Treatments: Issues and Opinions for an Expanded Federal Role" using Bardach's Eightfold Path.

Bardach's eightfold path includes specific steps for assessment including: (1) Defining the problem; (2) assembling some evidence; (3) Construction of alternatives; (4) selection of criteria; (5) projection of the outcomes; (6) confrontation of the trade-offs; (7) decisions; and (8) telling the story.

Defining the Problem

The work entitled "Research on the Comparative Effectiveness of Medical Treatments: Issues and Opinions for an Expanded Federal Role" was published by the Congressional Budget Office in November 2007 and is focused on the rising health care costs and the challenge that these represent for the federal government and private payers alike. It is noted in this work that there is a "variety of evidence" suggesting that there are existing opportunities to "constrain health care costs both in the public programs and in the rest of the health system without adverse health consequences." (GAO, 2007)

II. Assembling Some Evidence

Federal spending on Medicare and Medicaid is noted to have increased and in fact tripling "over the past 30 years…as a share of gross domestic product (GDP), rising from about 1.3% in 1975 to about 4% in 2007." (GAO, 2007) If the costs per enrollee stay on the path of growth over the next four years as they have in the previous four "then federal spending on those programs would reach about 17% of the economy." (GAO, 2007) It is reported that evidence concerning which treatments are most effective for which patients is many times not available.

III. Construction of Alternatives

Alternatives stated to be available by the Congressional Budget Office includes the following:

(1) Because any private sector entity, such as a health plan has only a limited incentive to produce or pay for information that could benefit many entities an argument can be made for a larger federal role in coordinating and funding research on comparative effectiveness.(2) In addition, because federal health insurance programs play such a large role in financing medical care and account for such a large share of the budget, the federal government itself has an interest in generating evaluations of the effectiveness of different approaches to health care.

(3) If policymakers wanted to expand federal efforts to study comparative effectiveness, the endeavor could be organized in different ways -- for instance, by augmenting an existing agency, by establishing a new agency, by supporting an existing quasi-governmental organization, or by creating a new public-private partnership. In choosing an organizational arrangement and a mechanism to provide federal funds to it, tradeoffs could arise between the entity's independence from political pressure and its accountability to policymakers and other interested parties. Efforts to bolster comparative effectiveness research would be more likely to change medical practice if the organization coordinating the research was respected and trusted by doctors and other professionals in the health sector. The level of funding required for a new or augmented entity would depend largely on what its additional activities involved. Synthesizing existing studies or analyzing available data on medical claims would be less expensive than conducting new head-to-head clinical trials to compare treatments but could also yield less definitive results -- and therefore might have a smaller impact on medical practice.

(4) Clinical trials could be more persuasive but also more time-consuming, and there is probably a limit to how many comparative trials could be undertaken effectively at any given time. If privacy concerns could be….....