Cargando…

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

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare centralized reimbursement/coverage decision-making processes for health technologies in 23 European countries, according to: mandate, authority, structure, and policy options; mechanisms for identifying, selecting, and evaluating technologies; cli...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Stafinski, Tania, Menon, Devidas, Davis, Caroline, McCabe, Christopher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove Medical Press 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3202480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22046102
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S14407
_version_ 1782214996968603648
author Stafinski, Tania
Menon, Devidas
Davis, Caroline
McCabe, Christopher
author_facet Stafinski, Tania
Menon, Devidas
Davis, Caroline
McCabe, Christopher
author_sort Stafinski, Tania
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare centralized reimbursement/coverage decision-making processes for health technologies in 23 European countries, according to: mandate, authority, structure, and policy options; mechanisms for identifying, selecting, and evaluating technologies; clinical and economic evidence expectations; committee composition, procedures, and factors considered; available conditional reimbursement options for promising new technologies; and the manufacturers’ roles in the process. METHODS: A comprehensive review of publicly available information from peer-reviewed literature (using a variety of bibliographic databases) and gray literature (eg, working papers, committee reports, presentations, and government documents) was conducted. Policy experts in each of the 23 countries were also contacted. All information collected was reviewed by two independent researchers. RESULTS: Most European countries have established centralized reimbursement systems for making decisions on health technologies. However, the scope of technologies considered, as well as processes for identifying, selecting, and reviewing them varies. All systems include an assessment of clinical evidence, compiled in accordance with their own guidelines or internationally recognized published ones. In addition, most systems require an economic evaluation. The quality of such information is typically assessed by content and methodological experts. Committees responsible for formulating recommendations or decisions are multidisciplinary. While criteria used by committees appear transparent, how they are operationalized during deliberations remains unclear. Increasingly, reimbursement systems are expressing interest in and/or implementing reimbursement policy options that extend beyond the traditional “yes,” “no,” or “yes with restrictions” options. Such options typically require greater involvement of manufacturers which, to date, has been limited. CONCLUSION: Centralized reimbursement systems have become an important policy tool in many European countries. Nevertheless, there remains a lack of transparency around critical elements, such as how multiple factors or criteria are weighed during committee deliberations.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3202480
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Dove Medical Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-32024802011-11-01 Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe Stafinski, Tania Menon, Devidas Davis, Caroline McCabe, Christopher Clinicoecon Outcomes Res Original Research BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare centralized reimbursement/coverage decision-making processes for health technologies in 23 European countries, according to: mandate, authority, structure, and policy options; mechanisms for identifying, selecting, and evaluating technologies; clinical and economic evidence expectations; committee composition, procedures, and factors considered; available conditional reimbursement options for promising new technologies; and the manufacturers’ roles in the process. METHODS: A comprehensive review of publicly available information from peer-reviewed literature (using a variety of bibliographic databases) and gray literature (eg, working papers, committee reports, presentations, and government documents) was conducted. Policy experts in each of the 23 countries were also contacted. All information collected was reviewed by two independent researchers. RESULTS: Most European countries have established centralized reimbursement systems for making decisions on health technologies. However, the scope of technologies considered, as well as processes for identifying, selecting, and reviewing them varies. All systems include an assessment of clinical evidence, compiled in accordance with their own guidelines or internationally recognized published ones. In addition, most systems require an economic evaluation. The quality of such information is typically assessed by content and methodological experts. Committees responsible for formulating recommendations or decisions are multidisciplinary. While criteria used by committees appear transparent, how they are operationalized during deliberations remains unclear. Increasingly, reimbursement systems are expressing interest in and/or implementing reimbursement policy options that extend beyond the traditional “yes,” “no,” or “yes with restrictions” options. Such options typically require greater involvement of manufacturers which, to date, has been limited. CONCLUSION: Centralized reimbursement systems have become an important policy tool in many European countries. Nevertheless, there remains a lack of transparency around critical elements, such as how multiple factors or criteria are weighed during committee deliberations. Dove Medical Press 2011-08-30 /pmc/articles/PMC3202480/ /pubmed/22046102 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S14407 Text en © 2011 Stafinski et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd. This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Research
Stafinski, Tania
Menon, Devidas
Davis, Caroline
McCabe, Christopher
Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title_full Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title_fullStr Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title_full_unstemmed Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title_short Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
title_sort role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in europe
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3202480/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22046102
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S14407
work_keys_str_mv AT stafinskitania roleofcentralizedreviewprocessesformakingreimbursementdecisionsonnewhealthtechnologiesineurope
AT menondevidas roleofcentralizedreviewprocessesformakingreimbursementdecisionsonnewhealthtechnologiesineurope
AT daviscaroline roleofcentralizedreviewprocessesformakingreimbursementdecisionsonnewhealthtechnologiesineurope
AT mccabechristopher roleofcentralizedreviewprocessesformakingreimbursementdecisionsonnewhealthtechnologiesineurope