IOM Report Calls For Tracking System To Fight Counterfeit Drug Trade.

The AP (2/14, Neergaard) reports that the Institute of Medicine on Wednesday released a report that concludes, tackling the "problem of fake drugs will require creating a national drug-tracking system." The IOM's report calling "for putting medications through a chain of custody like US courts require for evidence in a trial comes a week after the Food and Drug Administration warned doctors, for the third time in about a year, that it discovered a counterfeit batch of the cancer drug Avastin [bevacizumab] that lacked the real tumor-killing ingredient."

        NPR (2/13, Knox) in its "Shots" blog reports that the "National Academies of Science, of which the IOM is part, was commissioned by the Food and Drug Administration to look at how to protect people against fake and substandard drugs." According to the report, the problem "extends to more than 120 countries...and has done incalculable damage to efforts to control tuberculosis, malaria, AIDS and other diseases."

        The Wall Street Journal (2/14) "Corporate Intelligence" notes that the IOM report also emphasized that oversight of prescription drug wholesalers needs to be strengthened.

        AFP (2/14, Santini) adds that FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg "commended the report" and the agency is already implementing many of its suggestions. "To meet the challenges of today's global marketplace, the FDA is transforming from a predominantly domestically focused agency to one that is fully prepared to help ensure product safety and quality within a globalized world," Dr. Hamburg said in a statement.

        However, according to The Hill (2/14, Wilson) "Regwatch" blog, "Members of Congress want to create legislation to increase the crackdown and oversight effort." Rep. Henry Waxman (R-CA), the "ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee" said "I hope we can pass a law at the federal level that provides the same level of protection as California's model legislation," which requires "individual units of drugs to be accounted for at each step along the supply chain."

        Modern Healthcare (2/13, Zigmond, Subscription Publication), HealthDay (2/14, Gardner) and MedPage Today (2/14, Pittman) also cover the reports, which is titled, "Countering the Problem of Falsified and Substandard Drugs."

from DIA Daily

DIA Daily. This daily enewsletter features summaries of breaking news and information about the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device fields from thousands of global news sources. This easy-to-read enewsletter is delivered to your inbox every business morning.

Subscribe to the DIA Daily.
View archives.
iPhone and iPad Apps available! Download "BulletinHC."DIA Daily is a digest of the most important news selected from thousands of sources by the editors of BulletinHealthcare. The presence of content or advertising does not endorse, nor imply endorsement of, any products or services by the Drug Information Association. Neither BulletinHealthcare nor the Drug Information Association is liable for the use of or reliance on any information contained in this briefing.

If you would like more information about, or have a question pertaining to, DIA Membership and its benefits, please email membership@diahome.org.Click here to check your membership status.

Drug Information Association | 800 Enterprise Road, Suite 200 | Horsham, PA 19044
Copyright © 2012 by BulletinHealthcare| 11190 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 130 | Reston, VA 20191

IOM estimates suggest that as much as 750 billion dollars is spent every year within the US health system without contributing to better health

Global Health blog: Health Technology Assessment in the Americas

from Center for Global Development - Latest Updates by cgdev.rss@cgdev.org (CGD RSS feed)

By Amanda Glassman - This is a joint post with Kate McQueston.
“Every country, no matter how wealthy or how impoverished, cannot afford to waste money in healthcare on health technology that does not contribute to health.”

These words were spoken by Harvey V. Fineberg, the President of the Institute of Medicine, at a recent event co-hosted by CGD and PAHO, which highlighted the importance of supporting health technology assessment (HTA) in the Americas. Low-and middle-income countries are increasingly interested in building capacity for priority setting, particularly in regards to public funding in a time where pressures to incorporate costly new technologies are on the rise and donor contributions are stagnating. Over the past five years Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Colombia, Croatia, Estonia, the Republic of Korea, Malaysia, and Uruguay have also added health technology assessment agencies—tasked with varying responsibilities, including the generation or coordination of health technology assessment and budget impact analysis, as well as the creation recommendations for coverage or reimbursement decisions related to public spending.

Of his main key points, Dr. Fineberg pointed out that recent IOM estimates suggest that as much as 750 billion dollars is spent every year within the US health system without contributing to better health...

please see full article...

IOM - Connected coverage — selected articles on trends, challenges and controversies in the changing world of medicine.

OPINION

IOM’s landmark reports over the years

Connected coverage — selected articles on trends, challenges and controversies in the changing world of medicine.

Connected Coverage. Posted Oct. 8, 2012.

 

When the Institute of Medicine says something, people throughout the health system listen. The IOM, founded in 1970 as the health care arm of the National Academy of Sciences, functions to provide nonpartisan, practical reform advice to policymakers. The institute’s reports often are described as groundbreaking, seminal events in the world of health policy.

American Medical News regularly follows the work of the IOM and the specific impact the institute has on debates about physician issues. Some of the systemic problems the IOM has identified over the years include a prevalence of medical errors that cost patient lives, delivery system shortcomings that interfere with quality improvement, and wasteful utilization of health system resources that rob from patient care. The good news in these reports, however, is that the IOM thinks there are plenty of things that doctors and others can do about it.

IOM: Physicians play key role in stopping health system waste

http://www.ama-assn.org/amednews/2012/10/08/edsa1008.htm

Why We Aren't Ready for Patient-Centered Care, from guest blogger at HealthWorks Collective

The follow is a guest post by Aanand D. Naik, MD  @empoweringpts.
We hear lots of discussion nowadays about Patient-Centered Care.  Most legislation for health care reform proposes innovative models of care such as Accountable Care Organizations and the Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) with “Patient-Centered Care” at the core.  Given all the attention: Who could possibly be against Patient-Centered Care?

In this wake, I forward the controversial contention that many patients, probably a majority of health care providers, and every major health plan and health insurer really doesn’t believe in Patient-Centered Care.  Or at the very least, they aren’t ready to change the basic paradigms of health care to cultivate what Patient-Centered Care truly is and what its requires.  Simply put, we aren’t ready for Patient-Centered Care.

To clarify my argument, a clear understanding of Patient-Centered Care is needed.  The first consensus definition comes from the 2001 Institute of Medicine Report, Crossing the Quality Chasm.   The IOM report defines Patient-Centeredness as, “providing care that is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences, needs, and values and ensuring that patient values guide all clinical decisions.”  The report clarifies several principles of health system redesign that will better align health care along 6 quality dimensions.  The principles most closely tied to the dimension of Patient-Centeredness include: a) customization of care based on patient needs and values; b) the patient as the source of control; c) shared knowledge and the free flow of information, and d) the need for transparency.

For more, click here.