Advocacy
Primary Care Research
Background
Research related to the most common acute, chronic, and comorbid
conditions that primary care clinicians care for on a daily basis is
lacking. Research in these areas is vital because the overall health of a
population is directly linked to the strength of its primary care
health system. The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
supports research to improve health care quality, reduce costs, advance
patient safety, decrease medical errors, and broaden access to essential
services.
What we’re asking for
STFM and other CAFM organizations are asking Congress to fund AHRQ at a level of at least $405 million for fiscal year 2012.
Why we're asking for this
- Primary
care research funding is lacking the necessary funding despite the fact
that it is key to the development of a robust primary care system for
our nation that delivers higher quality of care and better health while
reducing the rising cost of care.
- We are asking for more funding for
primary care research in order to better understand how patients can
best decide how and when to seek care, introduce and disseminate new
discoveries into real life practice, and how to maximize appropriate
care.
- Ample funding for AHRQ can help researchers address these problems confronting our health system today.
Current Status
AHRQ receives $372 million in base funding from the evaluation tap in FY 2011, a $25 million reduction from FY 2010. AHRQ also receives $8 million through mandatory transfer from the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Trust Fund and $12 million from the Prevention and Public Health Fund, bringing total funding to $392 million in FY 2011.
CAFM
is asking Congress to increase primary care research funding and to
fund AHRQ at a level of at least $405 million for FY 2012.
Recent Activity
On April 21, 2011, STFM signed onto a Friends of
AHRQ coalition letter to the House asking for increased funding for
primary care research and AHRQ. STFM and other CAFM organizations
also sent testimony to the House and the Senate asking for
increased funding for primary care research and AHRQ.
On June 21,
2011, Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-VA) posted new programs to the
“Youcut” program, a web
based program that is designed to give people a chance to vote on
federal programs to be cut. One of the programs listed as an option is
to “Terminate Funding for So-Called Comparative Effectiveness Research
at the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality [AHRQ]." Because
this does not represent an actual bill or attempt to cut comparative
effectiveness research (CER), we are not asking for any action yet.
However, we expect CER to be targeted for cuts in future bills,
especially the House Labor/HHS Appropriations bill, which will come to
the floor later in the year. The data on how many "hits" comparative
effectiveness funding took in this poll will likely provide sound bites
for these votes. If and when AHRQ and research are targeted, we will
need a considerable response from STFM members when we send out action alerts.
How STFM Members Can Get Involved
In the event you get a chance to talk to your Members of Congress, here are some talking points that describe what comparative effectiveness research really is and why it is necessary to keep funding these programs.
- Comparative effectiveness research identifies what works best, for whom, in what circumstances. This information is evidence-based and provides both the physician and patient information with which to make better health care decisions.
- In this regard, comparative effectiveness research enhances competition—not stifles it, as the “You Cut” description suggests. With better information about their care, consumers can make better decisions and choose the treatments best for them, in the same way that Consumer Reports provides trusted information on the best cars, appliances, and other products. Informed choice is the fundamental principle of our market-based economy.
While in the Senate, Dr. Bill Frist recognized the importance of comparative effectiveness research and led the effort to authorize, through the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003, the comparative effectiveness research program at AHRQ. Funding for this new comparative effectiveness research program was first appropriated in FY 2005—spending legislation Mr. Cantor supported—and thus AHRQ’s comparative effectiveness program was launched under President George W. Bush’s administration
- This research is not duplicative, as “You Cut” suggests. AHRQ and NIH provide funding to local universities and private research institutions to produce comparative effectiveness research. Private sector entities, such as health plans and drug and device companies, also produce this research through their own R&D efforts, but federal funding of this research ensures transparency of the results to the general public. Federal funding for research is essential to ensuring balanced, unbiased, easily accessible information.
- Americans need more, not less, federally funded comparative effectiveness research to help them make more informed choices about the care they’re buying. Eliminating federal funding for comparative effectiveness research would be a disservice to consumers who themselves say they want better information about their care.
Resources
Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality—Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) is a small federal agency with the responsibility of research to support clinical decision-making, reduce costs, advance patient safety, and improve health care quality and access.
Friends of AHRQ—The Friends of AHRQ is a voluntary coalition of more than 250 organizations, including the four CAFM organizations, that support AHRQ by sending joint letters to key members of Congress, make joint visits to members of Congress and their staff, and holding briefings to demonstrate the importance of AHRQ.
House Appropriations Committee (spending levels)
Senate Appropriations Committee (spending levels)
