Joint replacements are the #1 expenditure of Medicare. The process of approving these medical devices is flawed according to the Institute of Medicine. It is time for patients' voices to be heard as stakeholders and for public support for increased medical device industry accountability and heightened protections for patients. Post-market registry. Product warranty. Patient/consumer stakeholder equity. Rescind industry pre-emptions/entitlements. All clinical trials must report all data.
Please share what you have learned!
Twitter: @JjrkCh
Showing posts with label medical information. Show all posts
Showing posts with label medical information. Show all posts

Thursday, April 12, 2012

U.S. News, TEDMED & "Give us our damned data"



Our Challenge to TEDMED  (FiDA blogger's bolding)

April 10, 2012  U.S. News - Health
Take away the 25 percent or so of U.S. adults that don't use the internet. At least 80 percent of those who remain, according to the latest survey by the Pew Internet & American Life Project, use it to look up health information. As medical care becomes more complicated and face-to-face time with caregivers more fraught, the percentage of information-seekers will surely grow.
But they may not get the help they need. Most people don't understand enough about health and medicine to make sense of the information they find. This is such a major concern that policy makers made improving health literacy their top health information priority in Healthy People 2020, the nation's leading health objectives for the decade. Another key objective is to improve the quality of health information on the web, because so much of the information floating through the ethernet is meaningless, confusing or just plain wrong.
You only have to look at our staff bios to see how seriously we at U.S. News take health data. We're actively working on a way to bring clarity to the individual health insurance market, by creating a web-based tool that will help users pick plans that best meet their needs. We've recently joined Consumers Union, the American Institute for Research and the University of Maryland in a Health Insurance Literacy Project designed to throw a rope to people drowning in incomprehensible health plan jargon.
So this evening we'll be looking on with interest, and some issues, as health information takes center stage at the Kennedy Center in Washington, D.C. The occasion is the annual TEDMED gathering of medical luminaries, whose traditional mission has been to wow attendees with quirkily brilliant ideas that display the convergence of technology, entertainment, and design (the TED part of the name).
This year's goal is more down to earth. TEDMED's new owner, Jay Walker, founder of Priceline.com, moved the meeting from San Diego to the nation's capital to get researchers, government agencies, and industry as collaborators--he wants to transform an idea incubator into a platform for change. "This is a spectacular opportunity to take TEDMED and grow it into something important for the nation and the world," Walker says.
His proposed vehicle, Great Challenges, will enlist TEDMED's high-powered attendees to tackle equally high-powered health problems. Funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 50 designated advocates will stump for votes at TEDMED on behalf of each one's challenge, such as making medical innovation more affordable, better managing chronic diseases, ending obesity and coming to grips with end-of-life care. TEDMED attendees will winnow the list to 20 and then Walker and his team will promote ongoing discussions on TV and webinars. The forum will be grandly public as opposed to small knots of individuals who zapped each other with energy in bars and hallways in TEDMEDs of old.
I was invited by Robert Wood Johnson to come to the previous TEDMED to observe, at foundation expense, sessions that helped define the roster of challenges that ultimately emerged. Encouragingly, seven of the 50 focus on aspects of medical data, such as the tension between data transparency and privacy, the imperative to improve communication between doctors and patients, and improving the quality of medical evidence.
What's missing, though, is the challenge to provide health consumers with the clear, trustworthy information they need if they are to make meaningful choices about where to get medical care—and from whom. Todd Park, the Obama Administration's recently named chief technology officer, likes to talk about "liberating the data" and putting it to work for patients and their families. Barring a last-minute change, no one will be officially lobbying for this at the Kennedy Center.
We'll advocate for it here. It's supremely ironic, in a world where experts coin terms like patient-centered care, that something so important—giving consumers the decision-support tools they so desperately desire—is so often overlooked.


JOLEEN CHAMBERS of TX 12:22PM April 12, 2012

TEDMED 2012 did not include patients and patient advocates. There is no portal for patients to participate on the dias without an invitation or as audience members unless they are trust-fund babies. This effectively directs the conversation to subjects that distract from this very real and offensive oversight. I am grateful to US News and this reporter for highlighting the need for providing the consumer with accessible/trustworthy healthcare data. Business providers are in the TEDMED room and the patient is not in the center-no matter how many times they say the mantra "patient-centered"!

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

Please Vote for TEDMed Challenges

Voting Ended 4/12/12 with 'The Role of the Patient' at #3 TEDMED Great Challenges!  Thank you!


Vote for #19 !  LINK HERE

Move your curser over the table to the far right and click on 'The Role of the Patient #19'.  You will be asked for your email address and then you can vote.   Thank you so much!



Friday, February 17, 2012

Honoring women leaders- Give us our Damned Data !


Congress Hears All-Male Testimony on Female Contraception 


Yesterday  I attended the Dallas Planned Parenthood luncheon-the largest in the nation(positive).  In the evening, I trained to resume as a grant reviewer for Dallas Womens Foundation(positive).  On TV, I caught the ugly visual of  a group of  men testifying about women's health in our nations' Capitol(negative).  Politicizing health and using gender as a wedge issue is evil and should be criminal.  Refuse to be an easy target.  Stand up and speak out!


Regina Holliday is prominently honored in this timely and excellent blog by Katie Matlack.
 Suzannah Fox is a fellow member of the Society for Participatory Medicine.


We are all demanding "give us our damned data" so that we can make life-enhancing decisions.  Implanted medical devices must be tracked & researched post-market to inform clinicians and consumers.


Blog by Katie Matlack - summary
Need to Know: 5 Women in Health IT 

You want irony? Try this: the Kaiser Family Foundation reports that we women are the ones make the health care choices for the kids in 8 out of 10 families. Yet women are far and away the minority gender in the world of health IT leaders. Health IT is one of the most important segments of health care, during a time of great change. If women are the ones who’ll be where the rubber hits the road when it comes to the future of health, why aren’t more of us, more involved, in determining what that future of health looks like?

While this is by no means the definitive list, I’ve done some research on the women who ARE making their mark in HIT. I list five to know below. They’ve been included both for their individual accomplishments and for the attention I think that’s due in the areas of health IT where they’re active. 

Regina Holliday - The Patient Advocate

Regina uses art to lobby for attention to be paid to patients; she became a patient advocate after witnessing her late husband’s struggle to receive appropriate care for kidney cancer. She paints at big-time medical conventions, reminding attendees that Meaningful Use (MU) requirements of new electronic medical records programs--oft discussed today in the context of government payouts--were created with the intent to improve patient care and save lives. And she reminds us that electronic health records (EHRs) should be clear and transparent. Why does an artist get top billing in a piece on information technology? Because her point--the that the goal of the technology is to make it easier for people to be and stay well--is, well, pretty important. 

Judith Faulkner - The Veteran

More than three decades ago Judith Faulkner started a small company, Epic, that has today grown into the provider of the EHR software for most of the largest hospitals in the US. Epic is also the system used by Kaiser Permanente, the biggest care provider in the country that’s not an arm of the government. And it’s in the running to be the solution used by the Veteran’s Administration (VA). Given that Faulkner is staunchly against an effort to have all EHRs move towards becoming interoperable with one another, this last fact has some folks mighty alarmed. Faulkner is still involved in any major company decision and drives the company’s unique corporate culture, and she’s got a seat on President Obama’s Health IT Policy Committee that’ll be making recommendations on “development and adoption of a nationwide health information infrastructure, including standards for the exchange of patient medical information.” 

Susannah Fox - The Researcher

She’s responsible for studying what goes on at the crossroads of technology, health and the interwebs, as the Researcher on Health and Health Care for the Pew Internet Project. So Susannah Fox brings us some mighty interesting data about the habits of Americans when it comes to how many of us look online for health information (59 percent), what specific kinds of health information we seek (specific diseases or conditions, treatments or procedures, and doctors or other health professionals), and who we seek it from (increasingly, from other people who might have conditions similar to ours). Fox blogs regularly on e-Patients.net and is helping researchers understand the habits of patients so that health IT can better meet those needs. 

Halle Tecco - The Connecter 

The company she co-founded has yet to celebrate its second birthday. Yet Tecco’s Rock Health --an accelerator “powering the future of the digital health ecosystem” by providing capital and mentorship to health startups--has funding from giants like Microsoft and Quest Diagnostics, and two of its “graduates” have secured additional funding from other investors. Tecco was chosen because of the power of her idea: that innovators could put tools and systems out there that could rejuvenate healthcare, make it not “just okay” but make it really rock. She was also chosen because she shows you don’t need to have gone to medical school to make a big impact in medicine: Tecco’s background is in tech (Apple, Intel) and business (she went to Harvard Business School). 

Amy Sheng - The Inventor

Sheng also co-created CellScope, Inc., with Erik Douglas, less than two years ago. CellScope uses optical attachments to transform smartphones into diagnostic-quality imaging systems. In the right hands, this technology has the potential to transform lives: in the developing world it can be used in village clinics, while here in the US consumers can use the CellScope to access expert diagnosis and advice. Sheng’s work demonstrates the great potential for telehealth solutions to break down the barriers separating developing countries from high quality health care.

Have I left anyone important off the list? Please email me at katie@softwareadvice.com with your suggestions and feedback. I sincerely appreciate it!

Katie Matlack is the Medical Analyst for Software Advice, a company based in Austin, Texas. You can view more of her work on the Software Advice blog



Wednesday, February 1, 2012

Consumers Union announcement of hospital rating data availability


CONSUMERS UNION NEWS RELEASE

For Immediate Release:  Wednesday, February 1, 2012
Contact:  Michael McCauley – mmccauley@consumer.org, 415-902-9537 (cell) or 415-431-6747, ext 126 (office) or Lisa McGiffert, lmcgiffert@consumer.org, 512-477-4431, ext 115

Central Line Bloodstream Infections Disclosed at Hospitals Nationwide   

Infection Disclosure Is A Milestone Following A Multi-Year Campaign
By Consumer Advocates to Make Information Public

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Department of Health & Human Services is now disclosing for the first time how hospitals across the country compare when it comes to central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSIs) in intensive care units.   CLABSI information for each hospital is posted on the federal Hospital Compare web site and will be updated quarterly.  The web site will provide information for other hospital-acquired infections in the future.
National hospital infection reporting follows a multi-year campaign by Consumers Union and other consumer advocates to mandate such disclosure.  The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) estimates that nearly 100,000 people die each year due to hospital-acquired infections and the hospital costs associated with these infections are estimated to be as high as $45 billion annually. 
“Consumer advocates across the nation have worked tirelessly to end the secrecy over hospital infection rates,” said Lisa McGiffert, director of Consumers Union’s Safe Patient Project (www.SafePatientProject.org).  “This is a milestone for patient safety that begins to make hospitals accountable for the two million patients who are infected each year.   Finally, Americans in all 50 states will be able to find out how well their hospital prevents these particular infections.  Public disclosure drives hospitals to improve care and helps patients choose hospitals with better safety records.”

Consumers Union, the nonprofit advocacy arm of Consumer Reports,  has prepared a set of tips for accessing the CLABSI information on Hospital Compare web site.   
Since 2004, Consumers Union has worked with a national network of consumer advocates to enact hospital infection reporting laws and helped pass such requirements in thirty states.  The majority of those state laws were based on Consumers Union’s model hospital infection reporting law.  Since launching the Safe Patient Project, Consumers Union has heard from thousands of patients harmed by infections who joined the campaign to push for reform.    
Beginning in January 2011, the federal government’s Medicare payment policies have required hospitals to report to the CDC’s National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) when patients develop CLABSIs in intensive care units. The NHSN is the same system used by most of the states with reporting mandates. 
The CDC estimated that 18,000 patients developed CLABSI infections in the ICU in 2009.  Of those patients who develop bloodstream infections in the hospital, up to one in four die. 
The CLABSI infection information disclosed on Hospital Compare are based on only three months of data (January-March 2011) and show how each hospital stacks up against the national benchmark for such infections.  But building a longer record over the coming year will provide a better indication of trends at each hospital. 
“If your hospital is no different than the national benchmark, that means too many patients are still suffering and dying from infections that could have been prevented with better care,” said McGiffert.  “The benchmark for success that hospitals should be striving to reach is zero.”    
Hospitals have started reporting surgical site infection rates to the CDC and that information will be posted on Hospital Compare every quarter beginning in 2013, starting with abdominal hysterectomy and colon surgeries.  According to the CDC, surgical site infections account for 20 percent of all hospital acquired infections.  In addition, information on the incidence of catheter-associated urinary tract infections will be available on Hospital Compare in 2013.
The new reporting requirements apply to hospitals that participate in the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) “pay-for-reporting” program and includes infections occurring in all patients, not just Medicare patients. Virtually all U.S. hospitals, excluding critical access hospitals, participate because they earn a higher Medicare payment for doing so.  
See Consumer Reports’hospital survival guide for advice on staying safe in the hospital. For information on more than 3,000 hospitals in all states, including infection Ratings for over 1,000 hospitals, see Consumer Reports Ratings (available to Consumer Reports subscribers).  Or try the new Consumer Reports hospital Ratings app which can be downloaded from the iTunes app store for $2.99.
###

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Medical Device Double Jeopardy?

Link to NEJM here. Breast Implant disappears during Pilates exercise.

This very brief article remarks upon treatment of a Maryland woman who had breast implant prosthesis (breast cancer).  She reported that her breast implant was swallowed into her body and disappeared.  The medical providers located the implant and added surgical mesh!  

Surgical mesh is a medical device that is being questioned for its' safety and effectiveness, yet surgeons continue to implant it into unsuspecting patients. www.truthinmedicine.us.com

What protections will she be provided if the surgical mesh proves to be a problem rather than a solution?  That is what Congress is responsible for determining:  right now, the charter of the FDA disallows patient stakeholder voting rights, there is no independent, accessible post-market data registry and legal protections unfairly favor the medical provider and medical device industry.   Patients beware!

Thursday, December 15, 2011

Health Leaders article: Docs Need to Blow the Whistle on Fraud

Doctors need to blow the whistle on fraud. (Link to Health Leaders/Joe Cantalupe article)


Docs Need to Blow the Whistle on Fraud

Joe Cantlupe, for HealthLeaders Media , December 15, 2011

Without skipping a beat, a huge medical device manufacturer allegedly found an easy way to influence physicians to use that company's brand of defibrillators and pacemakers.
How? By giving doctors kickbacks, the Justice Department says.
In a settlement agreement reached this week, Medtronic Inc. of Fridley, MN, agreed to pay $23.5 million to resolve allegations that it used physician payments as kickbacks to "induce doctors" to implant the company's products.
Daniel R. Levinson, inspector general of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, noted in a statement, "Patients trust that decisions to implant certain pacemakers or other medical devices are based on their own health interests and not influenced by kickbacks."
This kind of news can certainly erode patients' trust in doctors. And there's more.
The Justice Department's announcement about the Medtronic settlement was barely 24 hours old when, in a separate, unrelated case, several dozen federal and state investigators swooped into a radiology and diagnostic facility in Orange, NJ, arresting 13 doctors and a nurse practitioner in a cash-for-tests referral scheme.
"When physicians take kickbacks that influence how they practice medicine, it has the potential to taint the medical advice and care that is provided to their patients," Office of Inspector General Special Agent Tom O'Donnell said in an official statement.
Bribes and kickbacks are only part of the problem in healthcare fraud, which includes identity theft, illegal prescription drug sales, and countless other areas of wrongdoing. These transgressions do occasionally involve doctors.
The wrongdoing at Medtronic unraveled after two whistleblowers sued the company and alerted authorities to the problem, according to the Justice Department.
Because of their role, the do-gooders will receive a tidy sum of more than $3.96 million. Neither whistleblower was a physician. Justice Department officials declined to comment when I asked how many physicians may have been involved in the Medtronic case.
That's too bad. Physicians need to step up to ferret out fraud, not be a part of it. Most are honest, upholding the profession's reputation. The actions of a few can cast a long, foreboding shadow on the legions of honorable practitioners.
Shortly after he resigned as head of CMS, Don Berwick, MD, touched on the fraud issue in a conversation with journalists. In his 18-month tenure, Berwick said he found that fraud, waste, and abuse were more significant problems than he previously thought. Apparently, Berwick didn't realize how widespread the problem really is.
That's surprising. There were plenty of clues before Berwick stepped into his office in April 2011 that fraud was a big and burgeoning trouble spot in healthcare. Now that he has left, CMS appears to be struggling still with how to uncover fraud, as the behemoth agency tries to raise quality standards under healthcare reform, while also dealing with inadequate data systems that would improve its watchdog functions (more on that in a moment).
As for Berwick, one federal official who is knowledgeable about these decisions told me the CMS leader "was concentrating on other things," such as forming Accountable Care Organizations.
It seems that fraud in Medicare and Medicaid will be a major challenge for Berwick's successor to overcome. Federal officials want physicians to play an instrumental role in helping to stop fraud, and they're backing up that desire with the power of the dollar. Healthcare reform provides fiscal incentives to do so. Berwick had estimated that fraud, waste, and abuse total about $30 billion a year for the whole healthcare system, including up to $10 billion just within CMS.
The week Berwick talked about fraud with journalists, Gary Cantrell, assistant inspector general for the Office of Inspector General (OIG) at HHS, addressed the extent of Medicaid fraud in Congressional testimony. His comments didn't make headlines, but they were revealing nevertheless, as he described the widespread scope of Medicaid fraud, including prescription drug abuse and problems in the home health care services arena.
"We are now seeing more Medicaid fraud cases involving home health services than any other single program area," Cantrell told two House subcommittees. One investigation of a leading home health services company, Maxim Healthcare Services, led to a $150 million settlement of fraud charges.
Fraud in home health services is not a new problem. There have been repeated warnings that CMS needs to address the issue.
"Auditors have been concerned about fraud in home health care for years, but the problem never seems to get solved," according to a 2009 report from the Cato Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C.
As in Medicare, Cantrell identified "persistent fraud trends" involving misuse of prescription drugs in Medicaid. He referred to a case in Washington state in which a physician established connections with local heroin users and wrote medically unnecessary prescriptions for narcotics, including Oxycodone and Vicodin.
Cantrell also revealed that the OIG has a list of the 10 "most wanted" healthcare fugitives. Among them: an Illinois physician, Gautam Gupta, MD, sought for allegedly defrauding Medicaid and private insurance companies of more than $24 million, through weight loss clinics.
Whether it's improper billing procedures or weight loss fraud, Medicaid investigations are hampered by a lack of "national-level, timely Medicaid data," he says. While the Medicare databases are efficient, Medicaid's Medicaid Statistical Information System (MSIS) is the only source of nationwide Medicaid claims, but it is typically 1½ years old when released by CMS to users for data analysis purposes, which renders it ineffective for investigative purposes. "In law enforcement, a 1½-year time lag is an eternity," Cantrell says.
Essentially, the OIG is waiting for CMS to get its act together.
In the meantime, Cantrell says he's hoping that providers and patients get more involved in thwarting fraud. The OIG's website offers a tip line for fraud cases. And the OIG recently published a white paper, A Roadmap for New Physicians: Avoiding Medicare and Medicaid Fraud and Abuse.
This roadmap offers a journey worth taking, because the integrity of the profession is at a crossroads.


Joe Cantlupe is a senior editor with HealthLeaders Media Online. He can be reached atjcantlupe@healthleadersmedia.com.

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

Lawsuit: Public Citizen represents patients' right to criticize dentist.

PUBLIC CITIZEN PRESS RELEASE:
For Immediate Release:                                                                Contact: Angela Bradbery (202) 588-7741
Nov. 30, 2011                                                                                                       Dorry Samuels (202) 588-7742
 
Requiring Patients to Give Up Right to Criticize Medical Practitioners Is Unconscionable, Lawsuit Says
 
Public Citizen Represents Maryland Man in First-of-Its-Kind Suit Against New York Dentist
 
WASHINGTON, D.C. – A New York dentist’s requirement that patients sign a contract agreeing not to criticize her is unconscionable, and the dentist should be prohibited from forcing patients to make such a promise in the future, Public Citizen said in a lawsuit filed late Tuesday.
 
The suit highlights a growing trend: doctors and dentists conditioning medical care on patients promising not to post negative comments about them online. The pledges are contained in paperwork that patients must sign before the doctor or dentist will see them. Public Citizen represents Robert Allen Lee, a Huntingtown, Md., resident and former patient of the New York dentist, Dr. Stacy Makhnevich.
 
A North Carolina company called “Medical Justice” sells forms containing these conditions to medical providers, marketing the forms as an effective way to prevent negative comments that may have an adverse effect on their practices. Medical Justice has been quoted as claiming that about 3,000 doctors and dentists use its products, including these forms. This lawsuit is believed to be the first over the provision restricting criticism. 
 
Moreover, the provision the dentist required the patient to sign in the case purported to give the dentist ownership of the criticism through a copyright clause. And Makhnevich has claimed that by posting criticism online, Lee was violating the copyright clause and so owes Makhnevich $100 a day.
 
“What began as a case of a sore tooth is now showcasing an unconscionable practice in which doctors and dentists force patients to leave their constitutional rights at the office door,” said Paul Alan Levy, the Public Citizen attorney representing Lee. “If people are upset about their care, they have a First Amendment right to tell people about it – by going online and posting their thoughts on Yelp, Facebook, Twitter and the like.”
 
The case began in October 2010, when Lee developed a severely sore tooth. The next month, he went to Makhnevich, whom he selected because the practice was covered by his insurance. Before he could be treated, he was handed forms to sign. One of them required Lee to agree not to publish any commentary about the dentist, not to disparage the dentist and to assign copyright to the dentist for any commentary that Lee wrote. Lee was reluctant to give up his right to publish commentary, but he was in severe pain and so signed the form.
 
Makhnevich billed Lee $4,766 for the dental work performed. Lee paid and asked the dentist to send the necessary paperwork to his insurance company, but the dentist sent the information to the wrong insurance provider. Lee then asked for his records so he could submit the claim himself; Makhnevich refused and instead referred Lee to a third party that demanded five percent of the total bill for copying the records.
 
In August 2011, Lee criticized Makhnevich on Yelp, DoctorBase and other online sites. The dentist then sent Lee a letter warning that Lee had violated the agreement and threatened to sue Lee for breach of contract and copyright infringement. The next month, Makhnevich contacted Yelp and DoctorBase and demanded Lee’s comments be removed. The review sites refused to remove the comments, because they regard purported copyright assignments as legally unenforceable. Makhnevich then sent invoices to Lee for $100 a day for copyright infringement in September and October, and sent another letter threatening to sue Lee.
 
This suit, which seeks class-action status, contends that the agreement Lee was required to sign is unconscionable and should be declared null and void. Further, requiring patients to surrender the right to publish truthful criticism violates medical practitioners’ duty to patients because they are placing their own interests above those of their patients. In addition, the agreement misuses copyright law to suppress expression.
 
“It is outrageous that a patient would have to sign away his constitutionally protected right to get treatment for a toothache,” Lee said. “I have to wonder what this dentist’s other patients have said to make her feel it was necessary to go to this extreme.”
 
Bruce Keller and Jeffrey Cunard of the New York-based law firm Debevoise & Plimpton LLP are co-counsel with Levy in the case.
 
 

Tuesday, October 25, 2011

The medical device industry venture capitalists fund politicians.

(link) Medical device venture capitalists fund friendly politicians.


October 25, 2011

Venture Capitalists Put Money on Easing Medical Device Rules



One afternoon last spring, a little-known congressman from Minnesota made an impassioned plea before a House oversight committee.
Rein in the Food and Drug Administration’s uncertain approval process for new medical devices, urged the Minnesota congressman, Erik Paulsen, or Minnesota and other states stand to lose up to 400,000 jobs because of lost investment in the device industry.
Over the following month, Mr. Paulsen’s campaign committee took in $74,000 from people with a stake in device regulation, much of it from executives affiliated with venture capital funds and their spouses. Now Mr. Paulsen, a two-term Republican, is a sponsor of a bill that would make it easier to bring new medical products to market.
As Congress considers reauthorizing a law that sets the fees for medical device makers, venture capitalists are emerging as a rich and influential ally of device companies eager to remove what they say are regulatory roadblocks in the approval process. The push has alarmed patient advocates and some doctors, who have been calling on the F.D.A. to intensify its oversight of devices, particularly in light of some all-metal artificial hips that are failing prematurely at an unusually high rate.
“They have this unwritten assumption that every new device is innovative,” Dr. Rita Redberg, who is the editor of the Archives of Internal Medicine, said, referring to the venture capital funds. But some devices, she said, “are killing people or causing significant harm.”
People associated with funds that underwrite companies developing new devices and other health products have made more than $3.3 million in political donations to Republicans, Democrats and political action committees over the past five years, according to an analysis of federal contributions by The New York Times.
Though such people donate for many reasons, about 20 percent of the money from the 182 donors identified by The Times went directly to candidates and political action committees supporting a streamlining of F.D.A. policy or other issues of importance to medical products producers. The total contributions from such donors could be much higher; The Times limited its analysis to individuals affiliated with venture capital funds that have joined two lobbying associations.
to run new and costly tests constantly, often duplicating past efforts.
Investment funds and business groups have also increased their lobbying in Washington and have generated a stream of reports arguing that regulations are crippling innovation and driving away investment.
“This is about survival,” said Michael Carusi, a general manager at an investment fund in Palo Alto, Calif., Advanced Technology Ventures, who contributed $1,000 to Mr. Paulsen. “We are deeply concerned about the future.”
Medical devices encompass a wide array of products, such as heart defibrillators, artificial joints and diagnostic equipment.
Lobbying to smooth the approval process has intensified over the last year as Congress prepares to reauthorize the law that requires device producers to pay fees to the F.D.A., fees that are used to pay the agency’s operating costs. Lawmakers have an opportunity to alter the agency’s regulatory procedures for the first time since the law last came up for renewal in 2007.
An industry lobbying group, the National Venture Capital Association, has intensified its focus on device regulation. In 2010, the association, which lobbies on many issues, spent more than $2.5 million, according to data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. About $350,000 of that was related to devices, drugs and health care, a figure that is expected to increase to $450,000 this year, said an association spokeswoman, Emily Mendell.
While it is not unusual for businesses to point to regulation as a barrier to economic and job growth, medical device investors have found a particularly receptive audience on Capitol Hill in recent months. In October alone, 10 bills have been introduced by Republicans in the House to speed up the F.D.A. device approval process; in the Senate, similar legislation has been introduced by Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat of Minnesota.
Since February, four House panels have held hearings on the impact of F.D.A. procedures on device approval. At those sessions, 19 of the 26 listed witnesses were investors, entrepreneurs, industry consultants, trade group officials or patients who said that agency delays in approving a device had harmed them or a loved one. The list included no patients injured by a flawed device; one hearing in the Senate had a more varied witness list. Two weeks ago, four Democratic congressmen wrote to their Republican counterparts about the imbalance in the House testimony and suggested the hearings had failed to address potential dangers “if medical devices are not appropriately regulated.”
The letter, signed by Henry A. Waxman of California, Diana DeGette of Colorado, John Dingell of Michigan and Frank Pallone of New Jersey, also urged that hearings be held on the metal hip problem and similar issues.
Venture fund executives like Mr. Carusi and lawmakers like Mr. Paulsen insist that they are equally concerned about safety. However, in their view, a big part of the problem at the F.D.A. is philosophical; top officials, these critics say, have overreacted to recent episodes involving flawed products and become risk-averse. As a result, devices are available first in Europe, they say.
“The key is to strike the right balance,” said Dr. Josh Makower, a device developer and a consultant to New Enterprise Associates, a venture fund in Palo Alto.
F.D.A. officials said they have recently tried to address investors’ concerns by announcing programs to encourage innovation and reduce regulatory burdens. Still, the head of the agency’s device division, Dr. Jeffrey E. Shuren, said that executives like Dr. Makower seemed more interested in politicizing the issue than resolving it through discussion.
“The dialogue has become more political and adversarial,” Dr. Shuren said.
Some medical experts have also questioned recent studies about the negative impact of regulations, calling the reviews flawed in methodology.
William Vodra, a lawyer in Washington who has worked closely with medical device producers, said that investors had legitimate concerns about regulatory speed. That is because the approval of a new device can begin a process in which a start-up company is acquired by a larger manufacturer and early investors profit by cashing out.
But such investors may be less interested in what happens to that device after it reaches the market because they have already moved on, said Mr. Vodra, who served on an Institute of Medicine panel that recently concluded the F.D.A. failed to properly assess the safety and effectiveness of many new devices.
Mr. Paulsen, the Minnesota congressman, did not respond to requests for an interview. But a spokesman, Tom Erickson, said that the lawmaker’s testimony this spring was unrelated to any campaign donations and reflected his long-held view that the F.D.A. was undermining an industry crucial to Minnesota.
“He gave his testimony because he feels these jobs are being threatened by an inconsistent and unpredictable F.D.A.,” Mr. Erickson said. Mr. Paulsen, along with Democrats and Republicans from states that are home to device makers, has also sought to repeal a tax on sales imposed on the industry under the health care overhaul law.
Dr. Makower, the venture fund consultant, has donated $5,000 to Mr. Paulsen, records show.
“I think that he understands this issue,” said Dr. Makower.

Simply put, the industry’s champions argue that the F.D.A. suffers from high personnel turnover, an unwieldy bureaucracy and a regimen that forces start-up device companies 

Thursday, October 20, 2011

The goal is safer patients - the tool is transparency!

(link) An implanted joint replacement device must prove that it is better than no device at all.


Hip Surgery Option Loses Key Backer


Injury From Metal Debris in Artificial Hips

All hip implants shed particles as they wear. Over time, debris from plastic components can lead to bone loss and device loosening. But in some patients, researchers believe, metallic debris, which is finer and greater in volume, can set off a different, more aggressive response.Related Article »

Mercury Fillings are a Failed Implanted Medical Device FiDA

(link) Cautionary YouTube video about mercury toxicity and dental amalgam

FDA Town Hall meetings in Irving, TX  3/10/11 and San Francisco 9/22/11 were attended by speakers on this topic.

Congratulations!: $25,000 Award to Empowered Patient Coalition

(link) Consumers Union - Excellence in Consumer Advocacy - Winner 

(link) Empowered Patient Coalition

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Device Data and essential Patient Rights

Hugo Campos serenades Medtronic in this YouTube video. (link)

(video link) Hugo Campos at Patient 2.0 in SF 9/25/11

He is talking about basic citizen rights!  Please help him by communicating this issue to your U.S. Representatives today.

Hugo was a fellow speaker at the FDA SF Town Hall meeting 9/22/11 and the Health 2.0 conference in SF.
Dr. Jeffrey Shuren (FDA/CDRH Director) agrees with Hugo that patient data should belong to the patient!

FaceBook:  www.facebook.com.bit.ly/ICDUG
Blog: ICDUserGroup.org
Twitter:  ICDUserGroup.org