Cargando…
Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose?
BACKGROUND: As preventive medicine is a cornerstone of managed care, most health plans have traditionally featured automatic vaccine coverage routed through the medical benefit. However, with the advent of emerging vaccines, managed care stakeholders must revise decision-making processes and choose...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy
2007
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10437628/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17955625 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2007.13.s7-b.16 |
_version_ | 1785092572924870656 |
---|---|
author | Minkoff, Neil B. |
author_facet | Minkoff, Neil B. |
author_sort | Minkoff, Neil B. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: As preventive medicine is a cornerstone of managed care, most health plans have traditionally featured automatic vaccine coverage routed through the medical benefit. However, with the advent of emerging vaccines, managed care stakeholders must revise decision-making processes and choose among multiple products targeting the same disease. OBJECTIVES: To review the motivating forces behind traditional vaccine coverage in managed care and discuss the need for managed care organizations (MCOs) to subject their vaccine policies to greater examination in the changing landscape of emerging vaccines. SUMMARY: While variable vaccine coverage or choices in vaccine coverage is a relatively novel concept in managed care, the evaluation of vaccines in this setting is usually most effectively performed via a traditional route for MCOs: the Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committee. In some cases, a technology assessment committee is a more appropriate avenue for evaluation, depending on the disease state, administration, and plan infrastructure. Through these routes of evaluation, criteria similar to those used for other pharmaceutical agents under review should be employed in the review of vaccine options. The primary criteria evaluated include safety, efficacy, cost, and value. In addition, a set of miscellaneous factors must also be considered, including both tangible and intangible components. For example, the relevance of an agent to the specific covered population, compliance costs offsets, quality-of-life considerations, and both patient and provider demand should all be taken into account. Human papillomavirus vaccination provides a pragmatic example for applying the aforementioned strategy for vaccine evaluation in managed care. CONCLUSIONS: The changing landscape of vaccine coverage in managed care, particularly in the availability of novel agents, demonstrates a need for MCOs to subject their vaccine policies to much greater examination. Through traditional avenues such as P&T and technology assessment committees, stakeholders should seek to evaluate standard criteria such as safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, with additional considerations made for factors unique to the preventive nature of vaccines. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10437628 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2007 |
publisher | Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-104376282023-08-21 Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? Minkoff, Neil B. J Manag Care Pharm Cea BACKGROUND: As preventive medicine is a cornerstone of managed care, most health plans have traditionally featured automatic vaccine coverage routed through the medical benefit. However, with the advent of emerging vaccines, managed care stakeholders must revise decision-making processes and choose among multiple products targeting the same disease. OBJECTIVES: To review the motivating forces behind traditional vaccine coverage in managed care and discuss the need for managed care organizations (MCOs) to subject their vaccine policies to greater examination in the changing landscape of emerging vaccines. SUMMARY: While variable vaccine coverage or choices in vaccine coverage is a relatively novel concept in managed care, the evaluation of vaccines in this setting is usually most effectively performed via a traditional route for MCOs: the Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committee. In some cases, a technology assessment committee is a more appropriate avenue for evaluation, depending on the disease state, administration, and plan infrastructure. Through these routes of evaluation, criteria similar to those used for other pharmaceutical agents under review should be employed in the review of vaccine options. The primary criteria evaluated include safety, efficacy, cost, and value. In addition, a set of miscellaneous factors must also be considered, including both tangible and intangible components. For example, the relevance of an agent to the specific covered population, compliance costs offsets, quality-of-life considerations, and both patient and provider demand should all be taken into account. Human papillomavirus vaccination provides a pragmatic example for applying the aforementioned strategy for vaccine evaluation in managed care. CONCLUSIONS: The changing landscape of vaccine coverage in managed care, particularly in the availability of novel agents, demonstrates a need for MCOs to subject their vaccine policies to much greater examination. Through traditional avenues such as P&T and technology assessment committees, stakeholders should seek to evaluate standard criteria such as safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness, with additional considerations made for factors unique to the preventive nature of vaccines. Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy 2007-09 /pmc/articles/PMC10437628/ /pubmed/17955625 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2007.13.s7-b.16 Text en Copyright © 2007, Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited. |
spellingShingle | Cea Minkoff, Neil B. Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title | Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title_full | Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title_fullStr | Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title_full_unstemmed | Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title_short | Multiple Vaccines: How Do We Choose? |
title_sort | multiple vaccines: how do we choose? |
topic | Cea |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10437628/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17955625 http://dx.doi.org/10.18553/jmcp.2007.13.s7-b.16 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT minkoffneilb multiplevaccineshowdowechoose |