Literature DB >> 35698135

Market access and value-based pricing of digital health applications in Germany.

Daniel Gensorowsky1, Julian Witte2, Manuel Batram2, Wolfgang Greiner3.   

Abstract

In December 2019, the Digital Health Care Act ("Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz") introduced a general entitlement to the provision and reimbursement of digital health applications (DiGA) for insured persons in the German statutory health insurance. As establishing a new digital service area within the solidarity-based insurance system implies several administrative and regulatory challenges, this paper aims to describe the legal framework for DiGA market access and pricing as well as the status quo of the DiGA market. Furthermore, we provide a basic approach to deriving value-based DiGA prices.To become eligible for reimbursement, the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices evaluates the compliance of a DiGA with general requirements (e.g., safety and data protection) and its positive healthcare effects (i.e., medical benefit or improvements of care structure and processes) in a fast-track process. Manufacturers may provide evidence for the benefits of their DiGA either directly with the application for the fast-track process or generate it during a trial phase that includes temporary reimbursement. After one year of \]reimbursement, the freely-set manufacturer price is replaced by a price negotiated between the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds and the manufacturer. By February 2022, 30 DiGA had successfully completed the fast-track process. 73% make use of the trial phase and have not yet proven their benefit. Given this dynamic growth of the DiGA market and the low minimum evidence standards, fair pricing remains the central point of contention. The regulatory framework makes the patient-relevant benefits of a DiGA a pricing criterion to be considered in particular. Yet, it does not indicate how the benefits of a DiGA should be translated into a reasonable price. Our evidence-based approach to value-based DiGA pricing approximates the SHI's willingness to pay by the average cost-effectiveness of one or more established therapy in a field of indication and furthermore considers the positive healthcare effects of a DiGA.The proposed approach can be fitted into DiGA pricing processes under the given regulatory framework and can provide objective guidance for price negotiations. However, it is only one piece of the pricing puzzle, and numerous methodological and procedural issues related to DiGA pricing are still open. Thus, it remains to be seen to what extent DiGA prices will follow the premise of value-based pricing.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  DiGA; Digital health applications; Fast-track process; Market access; Statutory health insurance; Value-based pricing; eHealth

Year:  2022        PMID: 35698135      PMCID: PMC9195309          DOI: 10.1186/s12962-022-00359-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc        ISSN: 1478-7547


  9 in total

1.  The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation: will it help German policy making?

Authors:  Werner B F Brouwer; Frans F H Rutten
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.046

2.  Is rate of return pricing a useful approach when value-based pricing is not appropriate?

Authors:  Michael Drummond; Adrian Towse
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2019-09

3.  Operationalizing value-based pricing of medicines : a taxonomy of approaches.

Authors:  Jon Sussex; Adrian Towse; Nancy Devlin
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  The Probabilistic Efficiency Frontier: A Framework for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Germany Put into Practice for Hepatitis C Treatment Options.

Authors:  Axel C Mühlbacher; Andrew Sadler
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2017-02-16       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  The Alcohol Abstinence Self-Efficacy scale.

Authors:  C C DiClemente; J P Carbonari; R P Montgomery; S O Hughes
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol       Date:  1994-03

6.  OFT, VBP: QED?

Authors:  Karl Claxton
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2007-06       Impact factor: 3.046

7.  A Brief Survey on Six Basic and Reduced eHealth Indicators in Seven Countries in 2017.

Authors:  Reinhold Haux; Elske Ammenwerth; Sabine Koch; Christoph U Lehmann; Hyeoun-Ae Park; Kaija Saranto; C P Wong
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 2.342

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.