ACC 2009 Advocacy Position Statement: Principles for Comparative Effectiveness Research

Abstract

The ACC is strongly supportive of a robust CER program that will better inform the health care decision-making of patients and their health care professionals. The ACC also supports cost-effectiveness analyses that are based on high-quality comparative clinical effectiveness research. Since cost-effectiveness analyses vary depending on the assumptions used, and since such assumptions vary depending on the payer, multiple analyses for any technology or procedure may, in fact, be carried out. Furthermore, decisions on matters related to insurance coverage should not be made by an entity responsible for CER. The ACC stands ready to support CER through the College's NCDR registries and can play an important role in the dissemination and implementation of the findings resulting from such research through ACCF/AHA guidelines, AUC, and other documents, and through the College's growing efforts in the area of implementation science. Ultimately, studying the comparative effectiveness of available diagnostic tools and therapies for any given condition is only 1 step in the translation of research into practice and should be considered in the broader context of basic research, clinical trials, and outcomes research. The ACC believes CER, when conducted correctly, is a useful tool that assists physicians and other providers in delivering high-quality, equitable, and effective health care to patients. © 2009 American College of Cardiology Foundation.