CAN WE MAKE GLOBAL VALUE ASSESSMENTS MORE FLEXIBLE AND COMPREHENSIVE?

Author(s)

Moderator: Peter Neumann, ScD, Professor & Director, Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA
Panelists: Finn Børlum Kristensen, MD, PhD, Professor, Department of Public Health, Research Unit of User Perspectives, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Hilleroed, Denmark; Mark Sculpher, PhD, Professor of Health Economics, Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK; Devin Incerti, PhD, Senior Research Economist, Precision Health Economics, Los Angeles, CA, USA

ISSUE: Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) provides a rigorous framework for measuring value and assessing tradeoffs to facilitate decision-making across alternatives. Nevertheless, policymakers often adapt CEA frameworks to suit their own contextual priorities. For example, the United Kingdom (UK) makes reimbursement decisions based upon cost-effectiveness thresholds, but it allows for higher thresholds in certain contexts, such as end-of-life care. Some decision-making bodies have begun to use alternative approaches to health technology assessment, such as multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), which explicitly considers the individual criteria that may be relevant in evaluating tradeoffs within a particular context. There is a need to explore the lessons learned from different approaches to value assessment that have been implemented globally to understand the most viable solutions to account for societal priorities in systematic way. These issues need to be examined from a methodological perspective and from the standpoint of tractability to policymakers.

OVERVIEW: This panel will debate the merits of alternative approaches to account for societal priorities in health technology value assessments. Peter Neumann will summarize the different approaches for value assessment globally in the context of current policy trends. He will also frame the key pros and cons of established approaches. Can CEA account for the nuances of societal priorities? Can MCDA appropriately aggregate values in a standardized and consistent manner? Finn Kristensen will represent a European academic perspective, taking the stance that elements of both CEA and MCDA should be incorporated into future value assessments. Mark Sculpher will reflect on his experience in UK HTA and will argue that CEA can be expanded to reflect other aspects of social value but this has to be undertaken appropriately. Devin Incerti will represent a US methodological perspective and will argue for increased use of MCDA, speaking to recent progress in applications of MCDA.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2019-05, ISPOR 2019, New Orleans, LA, USA

Code

IP8

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×