Senators Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and David Vitter (R-La.) introduced S. 2347, the Diagnostic Imaging Services Access Protection Act in the U.S. Senate on April 25.
Treatment of localized prostate cancer with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) may provide improved disease control with less morbidity than conformal radiation therapy, according to an analysis published April 17 in the Journal of the American Medical Association. However, proton therapy did not appear to provide additional benefits for these patients.
The Department of Health and Human Services released a bulletin Dec. 15, outlining proposed policies that will give states more flexibility and freedom to implement the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a final rule that updates payment policies and rates for physicians and non-physician practitioners for services paid under the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule in calendar year 2012.
A model-based approach to device evaluation may offer decision-changing insights into medical device efficacy and durability, according to a perspective published Oct. 20 New England Journal of Medicine.
More than half of the members on panels that produced national guidelines for screening or treating diabetes and hyperlipidemia in the U.S. and Canada had a financial conflict of interest, according to an analysis published Oct. 11 in the British Medical Journal. Among 73 panel members who reported no conflicts, 11 percent were found to have one or more conflict of interests, the researchers reported.
An Institute of Medicine (IOM) committee has made six recommendations to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), for the process of defining essential health benefits (EHBs), mandated under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA). The HHS sought recommendations from the IOM in defining EHBs offered by health plans participating in newly created state health insurance exchanges.
Despite a recent Institute of Medicine report calling for the FDA to abandon its 510(k) medical device clearance process, many experts think reform, not abandonment, is the best path. That was among the findings in a Northwestern University survey funded by the Institute of Health Technology Studies that drew responses from more than 350 companies engaged in developing medical devices.
The Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) released a statement Sept. 16—the date of an FDA public meeting on the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM's) 510(k) report—detailing its opposition to the IOM's findings. The statement from Janet Trunzo, executive vice president for technology and regulatory affairs for AdvaMed, followed another critical review of the report issued in July from AdvaMed President and CEO Stephen J. Ubl.
Comparative effectiveness research (CER) presents both opportunities and challenges for radiology, according to an article published in the September issue of Academic Radiology. Patient communication, decision support and policy changes are essential to radiology’s survival in the comparative effectiveness era.
The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) recent recommendation to eliminate the 510(k) clearance process for medical devices has prompted a sharp exchange between its leaders and medical device manufacturers.
The Institute of Medicine (IOM) recommended the FDA scrap its 35-year-old 510(k) medical device clearance process and start anew, according to the findings of an evaluation released July 29, which chided the process as “flawed, based on its legislative foundation.”
|
|
|
|
RSS 
