Cargando…

Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study

Background: The accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework defines 4 conditions for legitimate healthcare coverage decision processes: Relevance, Publicity, Appeals, and Enforcement. The aim of this study was to reflect on how the diverse features of decision-making processes can be aligned w...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wagner, Monika, Samaha, Dima, Casciano, Roman, Brougham, Matthew, Abrishami, Payam, Petrie, Charles, Avouac, Bernard, Mantovani, Lorenzo, Sarría-Santamera, Antonio, Kind, Paul, Schlander, Michael, Tringali, Michele
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31441279
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2019.24
_version_ 1783445787899854848
author Wagner, Monika
Samaha, Dima
Casciano, Roman
Brougham, Matthew
Abrishami, Payam
Petrie, Charles
Avouac, Bernard
Mantovani, Lorenzo
Sarría-Santamera, Antonio
Kind, Paul
Schlander, Michael
Tringali, Michele
author_facet Wagner, Monika
Samaha, Dima
Casciano, Roman
Brougham, Matthew
Abrishami, Payam
Petrie, Charles
Avouac, Bernard
Mantovani, Lorenzo
Sarría-Santamera, Antonio
Kind, Paul
Schlander, Michael
Tringali, Michele
author_sort Wagner, Monika
collection PubMed
description Background: The accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework defines 4 conditions for legitimate healthcare coverage decision processes: Relevance, Publicity, Appeals, and Enforcement. The aim of this study was to reflect on how the diverse features of decision-making processes can be aligned with A4R conditions to guide decision-making towards legitimacy. Rare disease and regenerative therapies (RDRTs) pose special decision-making challenges and offer therefore a useful case study. Methods: Features operationalizing each A4R condition as well as three different approaches to address these features (cost-per-QALY-focused and multicriteria-based) were defined and organized into a matrix. Seven experts explored these features during a panel run under the Chatham House Rule and provided general and RDRT-specific recommendations. Responses were analyzed to identify converging and diverging recommendations. Results: Regarding Relevance, recommendations included supporting deliberation, stakeholder participation and grounding coverage decision criteria in normative and societal objectives. Thirteen of 17 proposed decision criteria were recommended by a majority of panelists. The usefulness of universal cost-effectiveness thresholds to inform allocative efficiency was challenged, particularly in the RDRT context. RDRTs raise specific issues that need to be considered; however, rarity should be viewed in relation to other aspects, such as disease severity and budget impact. Regarding Publicity, panelists recommended transparency about the values underlying a decision and value judgements used in selecting evidence. For Appeals, recommendations included a life-cycle approach with clear provisions for re-evaluations. For Enforcement, external quality reviews of decisions were recommended. Conclusion: Moving coverage decision-making processes towards enhanced legitimacy in general and in the RDRT context involves designing and refining approaches to support participation and deliberation, enhancing transparency, and allowing explicit consideration of multiple decision criteria that reflect normative and societal objectives.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6706971
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Kerman University of Medical Sciences
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67069712019-08-28 Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study Wagner, Monika Samaha, Dima Casciano, Roman Brougham, Matthew Abrishami, Payam Petrie, Charles Avouac, Bernard Mantovani, Lorenzo Sarría-Santamera, Antonio Kind, Paul Schlander, Michael Tringali, Michele Int J Health Policy Manag Original Article Background: The accountability for reasonableness (A4R) framework defines 4 conditions for legitimate healthcare coverage decision processes: Relevance, Publicity, Appeals, and Enforcement. The aim of this study was to reflect on how the diverse features of decision-making processes can be aligned with A4R conditions to guide decision-making towards legitimacy. Rare disease and regenerative therapies (RDRTs) pose special decision-making challenges and offer therefore a useful case study. Methods: Features operationalizing each A4R condition as well as three different approaches to address these features (cost-per-QALY-focused and multicriteria-based) were defined and organized into a matrix. Seven experts explored these features during a panel run under the Chatham House Rule and provided general and RDRT-specific recommendations. Responses were analyzed to identify converging and diverging recommendations. Results: Regarding Relevance, recommendations included supporting deliberation, stakeholder participation and grounding coverage decision criteria in normative and societal objectives. Thirteen of 17 proposed decision criteria were recommended by a majority of panelists. The usefulness of universal cost-effectiveness thresholds to inform allocative efficiency was challenged, particularly in the RDRT context. RDRTs raise specific issues that need to be considered; however, rarity should be viewed in relation to other aspects, such as disease severity and budget impact. Regarding Publicity, panelists recommended transparency about the values underlying a decision and value judgements used in selecting evidence. For Appeals, recommendations included a life-cycle approach with clear provisions for re-evaluations. For Enforcement, external quality reviews of decisions were recommended. Conclusion: Moving coverage decision-making processes towards enhanced legitimacy in general and in the RDRT context involves designing and refining approaches to support participation and deliberation, enhancing transparency, and allowing explicit consideration of multiple decision criteria that reflect normative and societal objectives. Kerman University of Medical Sciences 2019-05-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6706971/ /pubmed/31441279 http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2019.24 Text en © 2019 The Author(s); Published by Kerman University of Medical Sciences This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Wagner, Monika
Samaha, Dima
Casciano, Roman
Brougham, Matthew
Abrishami, Payam
Petrie, Charles
Avouac, Bernard
Mantovani, Lorenzo
Sarría-Santamera, Antonio
Kind, Paul
Schlander, Michael
Tringali, Michele
Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title_full Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title_fullStr Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title_full_unstemmed Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title_short Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness – A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study
title_sort moving towards accountability for reasonableness – a systematic exploration of the features of legitimate healthcare coverage decision-making processes using rare diseases and regenerative therapies as a case study
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6706971/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31441279
http://dx.doi.org/10.15171/ijhpm.2019.24
work_keys_str_mv AT wagnermonika movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT samahadima movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT cascianoroman movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT broughammatthew movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT abrishamipayam movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT petriecharles movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT avouacbernard movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT mantovanilorenzo movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT sarriasantameraantonio movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT kindpaul movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT schlandermichael movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy
AT tringalimichele movingtowardsaccountabilityforreasonablenessasystematicexplorationofthefeaturesoflegitimatehealthcarecoveragedecisionmakingprocessesusingrarediseasesandregenerativetherapiesasacasestudy