Partnership to Improve Patient Care

According to an article in Inside Health Policy, the American Medical Association is circulating a letter set go to the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI) raising concerns should PCORI use cost considerations in their definition of what they considered Patient Centered Outcomes Research (PCOR).

The article quoted AMA's letter as echoing concern with the potential inclusion of cost-based research in the definition:

“We do have questions concerning the last component of the definition that provides that PCOR: '[i]nvestigates (or may investigate) optimizing outcomes while addressing burden to individuals, resources, and other stakeholder perspectives.'”

“We seek further clarification toward the Board’s intentions regarding this last component and whether this includes cost analysis,” the letter states. “If that is the case, we do not believe that it is consistent with the PCORI’s enabling statute.”

The AMA was responding to the last line of the definition that says that PCOR seeks to optimize “outcomes while addressing burden to individuals, resources, and other stakeholder perspectives,” which the AMA believes could be construed as using CER as a cost-cutting mechanism.

In response to this letter, Inside Health Policy talked with the chairman of the Partnership to Improve Patient Care, Tony Coelho. Coelho said he believed PCORI Board Chairman Eugene Washington and Executive Director Joe Selby have every intention to ensure that PCORI research does not expand into cost-based research, and strongly agreed with the AMA that PCORI should make this clear in its research definition.  
  
PIPC also submitted comments to PCORI this week elaborating on this point and recommending additional changes in the draft definition.