This report originally appeared in the August 2009 issue of DOTmed Business News

National: Patient-Centered Outcomes Bill Introduced

Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) has introduced S. 1213, the Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Act of 2009, now, referred to the Committee on Finance. The bill would establish a nonprofit corporation, the `Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute'. The purpose of the Institute would be to assist clinicians and others in making informed health decisions through advancing the quality of evidence on how diseases, disorders and other health conditions can be prevented or diagnosed through research and evidence. The findings of clinical outcomes/effectiveness and appropriateness of the medical treatments or services would be disseminated to the industry.

The Institute will be required to identify national priorities for comparative clinical effectiveness research. It will take into account various factors such as disease incidence, prevalence and burden, evidence gaps in terms of clinical outcomes, the potential for new evidence concerning certain categories of health care services or treatments to improve patient health and well-being and the relevance to assisting patients and clinicians in making informed health decisions.

The Institute will also be required to provide support and resources to help patient and consumer representatives on the Board. It will also provide expert advisory panels appointed by the Institute to effectively participate in technical discussions regarding these complex research topics. The support would include continuing education and may include regular, ongoing opportunities for patient and consumer representatives to interact with each other.

Federal/State: 9th Circuit Ruling Allows Disability Discrimination Damages Regardless of Intent

A recent Ninth Circuit ruling in California may carry significant effect on disability accommodation rights. In Munson v. Del Taco, Inc., Case No. CV-05-5942, the court held that a plaintiff who establishes a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) need not prove intentional discrimination in order to obtain damages.

The original case claimed that Munson had been unable to use the restroom of the restaurant because the door was too narrow to accommodate a wheelchair, as well as other architectural barriers. Del Taco had appealed to the District Court holding it liable under California's Unruh Civil Rights Act on the basis that intent to discriminate is required under the Act. However, the Court noted that previous cases under the Unruh Act had been dismissed due to the requirement for intent, until the California legislature amended the Act to include a provision that any violation of the ADA would also constitute a violation of the Unruh Act. Because the ADA does not require proof of intentional discrimination, the Court held that the provision in the Unruh Act likewise does not require such proof.

More Industry Headlines