Currently Viewing:
The International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Value Assessment Frameworks Should Represent a Spectrum of Patient Preferences
September 08, 2017
Dr Patricia Danzon: Learning From European Health Systems
August 30, 2017
Dr Ilene Hollin: One-Size-Fits-All to Value Doesn't Work
August 23, 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
Currently Reading
Dr Steve Pearson's Outlook on the Ongoing Updates to ICER's Value Framework
June 18, 2017

Dr Steve Pearson's Outlook on the Ongoing Updates to ICER's Value Framework

As the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) prepares to update its final value proposal framework, it has been aided by the constructive comments from different stakeholders, said ICER president Steve Pearson, MD, MSc. He predicts that coming years will see continued interest in how to utilize such frameworks.


As the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) prepares to update its final value proposal framework, it has been aided by the constructive comments from different stakeholders, said ICER president Steve Pearson, MD, MSc. He predicts that coming years will see continued interest in how to utilize such frameworks.

Transcript (slightly modified)

How does ICER plan to update its value framework?

ICER has gone through a fairly long process now of getting public comment in 2 separate phases on our value framework, and we’ve actually received tremendously helpful suggestions in both phases. It’s taken us longer than we thought to get through the second phase, so we’ve been a bit delayed in announcing our final update proposals, but that should come out now within the next few weeks.

We’re really looking forward to continuing to work with stakeholders, because we learn as they learn as we continue to work together on these reports and as we go together to these public meetings. There will be further work to be done together, but we’re very exciting about putting out our update proposals and moving forward with the stakeholder groups.

What has been the uptake and use of value frameworks?

The growth of the use, if you will, the downloads have been going up and up. We hear a lot of anecdotal evidence, and there have been some surveys on the number of payers that are using our research to support both coverage decisions but also considerations around pricing and payment models.

I do think that there’s going to be continued interest in trying to figure out how to use value frameworks going forward. The value frameworks that are out there have very different histories, but also very different purposes, and so they’re kind of structured differently to meet those different goals. I think people are gaining more awareness of the reason that value frameworks don’t all look the same, because they have different functions, if you will.

I do think that a general purpose of trying to make as clear as possible and as fair as possible an approach to judging value is something that our health system really needs.

 
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!