Clinical Preventive Services for Women Closing the Gaps (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Appendix D Dissent and Response
Appendix D Dissent and Response
Pages 231-236
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 231... ...
DISSENTING OPINION Anthony Lo Sasso Summary Given the combination of the unacceptably short time frame for the PSW committee to conduct or solicit meaningful reviews of the evidence associated with the preventive nature of the services considered, this dissent advocates that no additional preventive services beyond those explicitly stated in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) be recommended for consideration by the Secretary for first dollar coverage until such time as the evidence can be objectively and systematically evaluated and an appropriate framework can be developed.
|
From page 232... ...
As the Report acknowledges, the lack of time prevented a serious and systematic review of evidence for preventive services. This should in no way reflect poorly on the tireless work of the committee and staff; it instead merely reflects the fact that the process set forth in the law was unrealistic in the time allocated to such an important and time-intensive undertaking.
|
From page 233... ...
That said, the clinical recommendations from the USPSTF were never intended to provide a basis for insurance coverage determinations; they are intended as guides to physician practice. Given the previous role of the USPSTF it is worth noting that basing coverage decisions categorically on USPSTF recommendations has the potential to jeopardize the objectivity and scientific integrity of the USPSTF review process.
|
From page 234... ...
. The authors consider coverage decisions for a hypothetical preventive service that is presumed to reduce the probability of a covered and potential costly healthcare treatment episode (for example, inpatient treatment of a preventable disease outcome)
|
From page 235... ...
At the first committee meeting, it was agreed that cost considerations were outside the scope of the charge, and that the committee should not attempt to duplicate the disparate review processes used by other bodies, such as the USPSTF, ACIP, and Bright Futures. HHS, with input from this committee, may consider other factors including cost in its development of coverage decisions.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.