探戈需要两个人。规定基于绩效的风险分担安排对双方都有效的条件。

IF 4.9 2区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Value in Health Pub Date : 2024-08-01 DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.2196
{"title":"探戈需要两个人。规定基于绩效的风险分担安排对双方都有效的条件。","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.2196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Faster regulatory approval processes often fail to achieve faster patient access. We seek an approach, using performance-based risk-sharing arrangements, to address uncertainty for payers regarding the relative effectiveness and value for money of products launched through accelerated approval schemes.</p><p>One important reason for risk sharing is to resolve differences of opinion between innovators and payers about a technology’s underlying value. To date, there has been no formal attempt to set out the circumstances in which risk sharing can address these differences.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We use a value of information framework to understand what a performance-based risk-sharing arrangements can, in principle, add to a reimbursement scheme, separating payer perspectives on cost-effectiveness and the value of research from those of the innovator. We find 16 scenarios, developing 5 rules to analyze these 16 scenarios, identifying cases in which risk sharing adds value for both parties.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We find that risk sharing provides an improved solution in 9 out of 16 combinations of payer and innovator expectations about treatment outcome and the value of further research. Among our assumptions, who pays for research and scheme administration costs are key.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Steps should be undertaken to make risk sharing more practical, ensuring that payers consider it an option. This requires additional costs to the health system falling on the innovator in an efficient way that aligns incentives for product development for global markets. Health systems benefits are earlier patient access to cost-effective treatments and payers with higher confidence of not wasting money. Innovators get greater returns while conducting research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23508,"journal":{"name":"Value in Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524023325/pdfft?md5=823b232a278064ad1a3a7839bd80bdc0&pid=1-s2.0-S1098301524023325-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"It Takes 2 to Tango. Setting Out the Conditions in Which Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements Work for Both Parties\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.2196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Faster regulatory approval processes often fail to achieve faster patient access. We seek an approach, using performance-based risk-sharing arrangements, to address uncertainty for payers regarding the relative effectiveness and value for money of products launched through accelerated approval schemes.</p><p>One important reason for risk sharing is to resolve differences of opinion between innovators and payers about a technology’s underlying value. To date, there has been no formal attempt to set out the circumstances in which risk sharing can address these differences.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We use a value of information framework to understand what a performance-based risk-sharing arrangements can, in principle, add to a reimbursement scheme, separating payer perspectives on cost-effectiveness and the value of research from those of the innovator. We find 16 scenarios, developing 5 rules to analyze these 16 scenarios, identifying cases in which risk sharing adds value for both parties.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>We find that risk sharing provides an improved solution in 9 out of 16 combinations of payer and innovator expectations about treatment outcome and the value of further research. Among our assumptions, who pays for research and scheme administration costs are key.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Steps should be undertaken to make risk sharing more practical, ensuring that payers consider it an option. This requires additional costs to the health system falling on the innovator in an efficient way that aligns incentives for product development for global markets. Health systems benefits are earlier patient access to cost-effective treatments and payers with higher confidence of not wasting money. Innovators get greater returns while conducting research.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23508,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Value in Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524023325/pdfft?md5=823b232a278064ad1a3a7839bd80bdc0&pid=1-s2.0-S1098301524023325-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Value in Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524023325\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1098301524023325","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标加快监管审批程序往往无法加快患者用药速度。我们寻求一种方法,利用基于绩效的风险分担安排,解决支付方对通过加速审批计划推出的产品的相对有效性和性价比的不确定性。风险分担的一个重要原因是解决创新者和支付方之间对某项技术潜在价值的意见分歧。我们使用信息价值框架来了解以绩效为基础的风险分担安排原则上能为报销计划增加什么,将支付方对成本效益和研究价值的观点与创新方的观点分开。结果我们发现,在支付方和创新方对治疗结果和进一步研究价值的 16 种预期组合中,风险分担为其中 9 种组合提供了更好的解决方案。在我们的假设中,谁来支付研究费用和计划管理费用是关键。结论应采取措施使风险分担更加实用,确保支付方将其视为一种选择。这就要求卫生系统的额外成本以一种有效的方式由创新者承担,从而使面向全球市场的产品开发激励机制保持一致。卫生系统的收益是患者更早地获得具有成本效益的治疗,支付方更有信心不浪费资金。创新者在开展研究的同时获得更大的回报。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
It Takes 2 to Tango. Setting Out the Conditions in Which Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements Work for Both Parties

Objectives

Faster regulatory approval processes often fail to achieve faster patient access. We seek an approach, using performance-based risk-sharing arrangements, to address uncertainty for payers regarding the relative effectiveness and value for money of products launched through accelerated approval schemes.

One important reason for risk sharing is to resolve differences of opinion between innovators and payers about a technology’s underlying value. To date, there has been no formal attempt to set out the circumstances in which risk sharing can address these differences.

Methods

We use a value of information framework to understand what a performance-based risk-sharing arrangements can, in principle, add to a reimbursement scheme, separating payer perspectives on cost-effectiveness and the value of research from those of the innovator. We find 16 scenarios, developing 5 rules to analyze these 16 scenarios, identifying cases in which risk sharing adds value for both parties.

Results

We find that risk sharing provides an improved solution in 9 out of 16 combinations of payer and innovator expectations about treatment outcome and the value of further research. Among our assumptions, who pays for research and scheme administration costs are key.

Conclusions

Steps should be undertaken to make risk sharing more practical, ensuring that payers consider it an option. This requires additional costs to the health system falling on the innovator in an efficient way that aligns incentives for product development for global markets. Health systems benefits are earlier patient access to cost-effective treatments and payers with higher confidence of not wasting money. Innovators get greater returns while conducting research.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Value in Health
Value in Health 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
3064
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Value in Health contains original research articles for pharmacoeconomics, health economics, and outcomes research (clinical, economic, and patient-reported outcomes/preference-based research), as well as conceptual and health policy articles that provide valuable information for health care decision-makers as well as the research community. As the official journal of ISPOR, Value in Health provides a forum for researchers, as well as health care decision-makers to translate outcomes research into health care decisions.
期刊最新文献
Analytical Methods for Comparing Uncontrolled Trials with External Controls from Real-World Data: a Systematic Literature Review and Comparison to European Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment Practice. Author Reply to "Cost-of/Burden-of-Illness Studies: Steps Backward?" Author Reply. Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1