Literature DB >> 20085389

Funding the unfundable: mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems.

Tania Stafinski1, Christopher J McCabe, Devidas Menon.   

Abstract

As tensions between payers, responsible for ensuring prudent and principled use of scarce resources, and both providers and patients, who legitimately want access to technologies from which they could benefit, continue to mount, interest in approaches to managing the uncertainty surrounding the introduction of new health technologies has heightened. The purpose of this project was to compile an inventory of various types of 'access with evidence development' (AED) schemes, examining characteristics of the technologies to which they have been applied, the uncertainty they sought to address, the terms of arrangements of each scheme, and the policy outcomes. It also aimed to identify issues related to such schemes, including advantages and disadvantages from the perspectives of various stakeholder groups. A comprehensive search, review and appraisal of peer-reviewed and 'grey' literature were performed, followed by a facilitated workshop of academics and decision makers with expertise in AED schemes. Information was extracted and compiled in tabular form to identify patterns or trends. To enhance the validity of interpretations made, member checking was performed. Although the concept of AED is not new, evaluative data are sparse. Despite varying opinions on the 'right' answers to some of the questions raised, there appears to be consensus on a 'way forward'--development of methodological guidelines. All stakeholders seemed to share the view that AEDs offer the potential to facilitate patient access to promising new technologies and encourage innovation while ensuring effective use of scarce healthcare resources. There is no agreement on what constitutes 'sufficient evidence', and it depends on the specific uncertainty in question. There is agreement on the need for 'best practice' guidelines around the implementation and evaluation of AED schemes. This is the first attempt at a comprehensive analysis of methods that have been used to address uncertainty concerning a new drug or other technology. The analysis reveals that, although various approaches have been experimented with, many of them have not achieved the ostensible goal of the approach. This article outlines challenges related to AED schemes and issues that remain unresolved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20085389     DOI: 10.2165/11530820-000000000-00000

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  29 in total

1.  Clinical use of medical devices in the 'Bermuda Triangle'.

Authors:  Larry Kessler; Scott D Ramsey; Sean Tunis; Sean D Sullivan
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2004 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 6.301

2.  Public funding of bosentan for the treatment of pulmonary artery hypertension in Australia: cost effectiveness and risk sharing.

Authors:  John H Wlodarczyk; Leslie G Cleland; Anne M Keogh; Keith D McNeil; Kate Perl; Robert G Weintraub; Trevor J Williams
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Quality based social insurance coverage and payment of the application of a high cost medical therapy: the case of spinal cord stimulation for chronic non-oncologic pain in The Netherlands.

Authors:  Nicoline Beersen; W Ken Redekop; J H Bart de Bruijn; Peter J Theuvenet; Marc Berg; Niek S Klazinga
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 4.  Site-ation pearl growing: methods and librarianship history and theory.

Authors:  Sheryl L Ramer
Journal:  J Med Libr Assoc       Date:  2005-07

5.  Radium-223 for men with hormone-refractory prostate cancer and bone metastases.

Authors:  Mike D Shelley; Malcolm D Mason
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 41.316

6.  Risk sharing and payment by results.

Authors:  A Breckenridge; T Walley
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 6.875

7.  Coverage with evidence development: ethical issues and policy implications.

Authors:  Franklin G Miller; Steven D Pearson
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 2.983

8.  Using clinical trials as a condition of coverage: lessons from the National Emphysema Treatment Trial.

Authors:  Tanisha Carino; Steven Sheingold; Sean Tunis
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 2.486

Review 9.  Market and patient access to new oncology products in Europe: a current, multidisciplinary perspective.

Authors:  C McCabe; L Bergmann; N Bosanquet; M Ellis; H Enzmann; M von Euler; B Jönsson; K-J Kallen; D Newling; V Nüssler; B Paschen; R de Wilde; N Wilking; C Teale; H Zwierzina
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2008-10-14       Impact factor: 32.976

10.  Impact of positron emission tomography/computed tomography and positron emission tomography (PET) alone on expected management of patients with cancer: initial results from the National Oncologic PET Registry.

Authors:  Bruce E Hillner; Barry A Siegel; Dawei Liu; Anthony F Shields; Ilana F Gareen; Lucy Hanna; Sharon Hartson Stine; R Edward Coleman
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-03-24       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  39 in total

1.  Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Caroline Davis; Christopher McCabe
Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2011-08-30

2.  Coping with uncertainty on health decisions: assessing new solutions.

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; Roberto Rodríguez-Ibeas; Carmelo A Juárez-Castelló
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2012-08

3.  Comparative effectiveness research: the view from a pharmaceutical company.

Authors:  Marc L Berger; David Grainger
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Single technology appraisal at the UK National Institute for Health and clinical excellence: a source of evidence and analysis for decision making internationally.

Authors:  Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Impact of a financial risk-sharing scheme on budget-impact estimations: a game-theoretic approach.

Authors:  Arieh Gavious; Dan Greenberg; Ariel Hammerman; Ella Segev
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2013-12-11

6.  Use of product listing agreements by Canadian provincial drug benefit plans.

Authors:  Steven G Morgan; Melissa K Friesen; Paige A Thomson; Jamie R Daw
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2013-05

7.  Orphan drugs for rare diseases: is it time to revisit their special market access status?

Authors:  Steven Simoens; David Cassiman; Marc Dooms; Eline Picavet
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2012-07-30       Impact factor: 9.546

8.  Access with evidence development schemes: a framework for description and evaluation.

Authors:  Christopher J McCabe; Tania Stafinski; Richard Edlin; Devidas Menon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  Principles of design of access with evidence development approaches: a consensus statement from the Banff Summit.

Authors:  Devidas Menon; Christopher J McCabe; Tania Stafinski; Richard Edlin
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  We know accurately only when we know little.

Authors:  Stuart MacLeod; Craig Mitton
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.