Assess Treatment Effectiveness

For healthcare professionals, it can be surprisingly difficult to gauge which treatments are working and which ones are not. Some conditions are easy to monitor and track, but for many, no straightforward clinical marker exists. How do you tell if you are truly making a difference – and how do you quantify it?

Apparently, the U.S. government agrees that this is an important challenge. In 2009, the term "comparative effectiveness" gained notoriety because of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA). This Act set aside $1.1 billion for comparative effectiveness, defined as scientific research that includes the analysis and comparison of treatments available for particular health conditions. In short, this process involves the assessment of treatment strengths and weaknesses (e.g. positive or negative impact on health).

Our tools, especially the SF-12v2^® Health Survey, are already being used in this capacity. By measuring a patient’s functional health and well-being pre- and post-treatment, our health surveys can help assess the medical benefits as well as the costs involved. Here are two examples of how our tools have been successfully adapted for these purposes:

• This CBS News Report highlights how a common and expensive surgical procedure was found to be unnecessary, a determination made with the help of QualityMetric’s SF-36^® Health Survey.
  
  
• QualityMetric's ongoing collaboration with Magellan Health Services demonstrates how the use of our health surveys has enabled the assessment of treatment effectiveness to be implemented for real-world use. To learn more, view this 25-minute presentation recorded at AHIP's Institute 2009. Or, download this case study describing Magellan's success thus far.