Center for Health Solutions: 2009 Research Agenda

Publish date:

The  Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, part of Deloitte LLP, produces research that is objective and data driven. Unlike many think tanks and foundations, we do not lobby for change. Our mission is to develop innovative, practical and workable solutions to systemic issues of the U.S. health system. Our research is solution driven and embraces a diversity of viewpoints. 

We do not begin addressing a problem with a preferred solution in mind; rather, we endeavor to highlight facts, trends and opinions relevant to understanding a problem completely and to offer solutions for consideration by key stakeholders. A key differentiator is that our solutions are actionable. 

Second, our research is focused on problems that cut across multiple stakeholders in the industry. Many of our topics have an impact on relevant parties in the health care system, including payors, providers, life sciences, large employers, and the federal and state government, but also intersect with industries such as banking, retail and others. We collaborate with both the private and public sector to get things done. We address overarching transformational themes and burning platforms that have the ability to transform the U.S. health care system.

Below is a list of studies** the Center has completed in 2007-2009 and is committed to completing in 2009. This list of topics is subject to change. 

Recently Completed Research Reports

Retail Clinics: Update and Implications (Published November 2009)
This analysis updates the Center’s initial study entitled 'Retail Clinics: Facts, Trends, and Implications' (March 2008) to highlight consumer adoption and financial performance of the retail medicine sector.

Methodology: Forecasts of utilization, financial performance and mitigating factors were used to assess the sustainability of the retail medicine sector.

Medical Tourism: Update and Implications (Published October 2009)
This report is an update to the Medical Tourism: Consumers in Search of Value report that profiled the ten hot spots for medical tourism that attracted 750,000 U.S. patients to offshore locations for elective inpatient and outpatient procedures. 

Methodology: This analysis used lagging and leading indicators and changes in economic conditions to forecast use of offshore surgical services.

Comparative Effectiveness: Perspectives for Consideration (Published May 2009)
Comparative effectiveness is the rigorous evaluation of the impact of different treatment options available for treating a given medical condition for a particular set of patients.  Although the U.S. annual health care expenditure is in excess of $2 trillion, less than 0.1% is currently invested in assessing the comparative effectiveness of available interventions.   The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (HR 1) has allocated $1.1 billion in new funding for the first quarter of 2009 with a new emphasis on Comparative Effectiveness Research.  Generating better evidence about the costs and benefits of different treatment options – through research on the comparative effectiveness of those options – has the potential to bend the curve in health care spending without adversely affecting health.

Methodology: This analysis provides details of how comparative effectiveness programs are implemented in the Australian, German, Canadian and United Kingdom health systems comparing approaches to prostate surgery (BPH), colonoscopy and stations.

2009 Survey of Health Care Consumers (Published March 2009) 
This survey, conducted by the Deloitte Center for Health Solutions, is Deloitte’s second annual study of health care consumers’ attitudes, behaviors and unmet needs. A nationally representative sample of 4,001 American adults, ages 18 and older, was surveyed between October 2 and 10, 2008, using a web-based questionnaire. The results were weighted to assure proper proportional representation to the nation’s population, as reflected in the U.S. Census, with respect to age, gender, income, race/ethnicity and geography. The margin of error around the U.S. point estimates is +/- 1.6 percent at the .95 confidence level.  The study’s framework reflects a broad-based view of consumerism in six zones: (1) wellness and healthy living, including self-care and health management; (2) information sources helpful in consumer decision making; (3) traditional health services provided by medical professionals, hospitals and retail clinics, as well as prescription medications and medical devices; (4) alternative health services sometimes described as complementary medicine; (5) insurance coverage and other financial considerations; and (6) opinions about health care reform.

 The ROI for Targeted Therapies: Assessing the Barriers and Incentives for Adopting Personalized Medicine   (Published January 2009)
Highlights of this report include:

• An examination of personalized medicine’s economic value proposition and the importance of return on investment (ROI) in advancing science
• A framework to quantify personalized medicine’s economic value proposition
• Details of the components of this ROI framework – impact on adverse events, life course of care and non-economic impacts on improved quality of care and life

     RSS ( What is RSS?) |     Twitter 

Last updated