One of the most challenging (and often rewarding) tasks we undertake in Technology Insights is helping hospitals manage physician preference item (PPI) spend. To this end, we provide analytical technology investment and physician negotiation support for hospitals. A common question we receive during these engagements is how much will comparative effectiveness research impact orthopedic and cardiovascular PPI spend in the coming years. Clearly, there's no question that comparative effectiveness research is needed to better understand and justify the money we spend on tests and therapies.
Much is still to be determined as to how this research will be organized, funded, and used in the near- and long-term, not the least of which is the role that industry will play in shaping new legislative bodies charged with devising and executing comparative effectiveness research. A recent article in the New England Journal of Medicine elevates these issues to the forefront of reform discussion. In the article, the author warns of the presence of industry on government comparative effectiveness committees and the potential implication: parties with commercial interest in legislative outcomes shaping future research priorities and methodologies.
Vendor Influence on Comparative Effectiveness Research Questioned