Currently Viewing:
The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Value Assessment Frameworks Should Represent a Spectrum of Patient Preferences
September 08, 2017
Currently Reading
Dr Patricia Danzon: Learning From European Health Systems
August 30, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon Highlights European Examples of Restraining Drug Prices
August 16, 2017
Dr Ilene Hollin Outlines Differing Definitions of Value
August 09, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon: Cost Effective Doesn't Mean Affordable
August 03, 2017
Dr Michael Sherman on Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Agreements
July 28, 2017
Dr David Cutler Assesses the Political Odds of Drug Pricing Reform
July 25, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson on Using Health Technology Assessment to Guide Decision Making
July 23, 2017
Dr Gail Wilensky: Increased Competition a Better Drug Pricing Solution Than Cost Controls
July 16, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson on Data Needed to Evaluate Clinical and Economic Effects of New Therapies
July 14, 2017
Dr David Cutler: Trump Administration's Attention Not on Value-Based Purchasing
July 09, 2017
Dr Gail Wilensky on the Likelihood of Continuing Value-Based Reimbursement Demonstrations
July 06, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson: Patient Perspectives Guide ICER Value Framework Development
July 04, 2017
Dr Scott Ramsey Addresses the Need for Differential Pricing Structures for Drugs
July 02, 2017
Dr Gail Wilensky Raises Questions About Medicaid's Matching Grant Structure
June 25, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson Explains How ICER Price Benchmarks Align Cost With Patient Benefits
June 22, 2017
Dr David Cutler Discusses Opportunities for Bipartisan ACA Reform
June 20, 2017
Dr Scott Ramsey on Challenges of Determining Cost Effectiveness of Novel Cancer Treatments
June 19, 2017
Dr Steve Pearson's Outlook on the Ongoing Updates to ICER's Value Framework
June 18, 2017

Dr Patricia Danzon: Learning From European Health Systems

The United States can benefit from taking and adapting certain elements of European countries’ systems and methods of assessing value, says Patricia Danzon, PhD, the Celia Moh Professor at The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.


The United States can benefit from taking and adapting certain elements of European countries’ systems and methods of assessing value, says Patricia Danzon, PhD, the Celia Moh Professor at The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

Transcript (slightly modified)

Is there something that Europe does well in assessing value that the United States can adopt or adapt?

There’s not a single European system that I’d say we would want to adopt wholesale, but there are elements. I think the United Kingdom’s system at measuring health outcomes, using QALYs [quality-adjusted life years], and various spinoffs of QALYs has been refined. It’s really in the English-speaking countries, so it includes the UK, Canada, Australia, and that literature on health outcomes measurement really is the most advanced in the world. I think we can definitely learn something from that, and I would say American academics contribute to that literature. It may not be used by our payers, but the academics contribute to that literature.

The system that is applied in the UK through NICE obviously uses a much lower threshold for willingness to pay—they use the £20,000 per QALY which is way below what we in the United States are willing to pay for health. So, if we were to adopt a system, based on cost per QALY, we would obviously use a higher threshold. But there are other elements of other countries’ systems that I think are worth noting, and one in particular—Germany has a system where when a new drug is launched, the drug can be on the market at a price that the company names for a year. During which, the payer assesses the value and decides whether or not to simply pay the existing price, or do a more thorough evaluation of the benefits of the drug and their appropriate price. 

That is a way of getting the drugs on the market right away, without waiting for the launch to occur after the evaluation has been done—which is more of the UK approach, you first do the evaluation, and then you get the reimbursement. The German approach says you can launch with a conditional price, while we do some preliminary evaluation. That, I think, is a better way of doing things because it gets new drugs to market but still gives the payer the chance to evaluate the effectiveness and make an assessment of price relative to value.

 
Copyright AJMC 2006-2017 Clinical Care Targeted Communications Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
x
Welcome the the new and improved AJMC.com, the premier managed market network. Tell us about yourself so that we can serve you better.
Sign Up
×

Sign In

Not a member? Sign up now!