Upload
chloe-sullivan
View
213
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Health Technology Assessment Perspectives and Trends
Abdulkadir Keskinaslan, MD, MBA, MPHMarket Pricing Director Asia Pac
29-31 Oct 2009, Kapadokya, Turkiye
2
Health care spend has reached USD 3.5 trillion in OECDProviders and distributors account for 66% followed by 17% for pharmaceuticals
296
592
567
2,364
1,797
OtherPayors/
PBMs BiotechnologyPharma-
ceuticals Devices/ Equipment
TotalProviders/ Distributors
1,722
70 253,565
171343
47
1,843
Note: Includes non-profit hospitals and services and government-owned hospitals and service providers; OECD countries only; 1 Conservative estimates considering only OECD countries
2005 Revenue, Health Care Industry1
17%
2%10%
66%
<1%5%
USD billion (nominal)Publicly traded companies Government & Non-profit Share of HC total
OECD
Source: McKinsey analysis; OECD, IMS
3
Demographic transition will be the leading cause of growth in health care spend
Global population ageing – decreasing fertility along with lengthening life expectancy shifting relative weight from younger to older groups
Regional differences in life expectancy at birth are expected to decrease – an interregional gap of about 7 years is expected by 2045-2050, down from approximately 9 years in the period 2025-2030 and from almost 12 years at present
Source: Lesthaeghe. 2000; WHO. World Population Ageing 1950-2050
4
0
200
400
Num
ber (
thou
sand
s)
0 20 40 60 80 100Age
OtherMusculoskeletalInjuriesDiabetesChronic respiratoryMentalNeurologicalCardiovascularCancer
1993
0
200
400
Num
ber (
thou
sand
s)
0 20 40 60 80 100Age
2023
Source: Carter R. Presented at HTA Workshop in Beijing 2008Referencing Begg S. 2008 also available athttp://www.aihw.gov.au/bod/index.cfm
Australia 1993–2023
Shift in burden of disease into specialty areas - oncology and neuroscience - will increase demand for services
5
Higher per capita health expenditure for elderly will further increase
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
0-4 5–14 15–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65–74 75+
pe
r ca
pita
exp
en
ditu
re
Male
Female
Source: Carter R. Presented at HTA Workshop in Beijing 2008Referencing Data from: AIHW (2005) Health system exp. on disease and injury in Australia, 2000-01. AIHW Cat No HWE 28
Australia 2000-2001
6
Health care spend has grown above GDP
Health care spendPercent of GDP, 1960–2006
Health care expenditure/capita in USD 000, PPP, 2005;
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010
1960
15.3%
11.3%
5.1%
4.9%
Growth in percent share of GDP, CAGR2006
2.4%
Health care spend as percent of GDP
1.8%
6.0% 10.6% 1.2%
3.9% 8.4% 1.6%
Source: Source: OECD Health Data 2008, McKinsey
7
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
2003 2013 2023 2033 2043
UoQ/AIHW (All health expenditure, including private sector
Inter-Generational Report: Federal Govt expenditure only
Productivity Commission (State & Federal Govt – no private expend)
% GDP
9.4 9.29.9
10.8
5.76.8
7.99.0
10.1
4.75.1
6.2
7.9
9.9
Health care spend as % of projected GDP will keep growing
Source: Carter R. Presented at HTA Workshop in Beijing 2008Referencing Data from: Begg S. 2008
Australia 2003-2033
8
Diabetes expenditure
Disease burden (DALYs) Per 100,000 population
USD per diabetic person
Productivity*
*Productivity as performance index is calculated as product of DALY and per capita total expenditure on health, normalized with value of US as 1.0. For country X, (DALY*Cost in US) /(DALY*Cost in Country X)
5.0
3.02.4
1.0
x5.0
232
340267
449
2,4312,713
4,430
6,231
Health care strategy is all about how you spend your moneyUK is about 5 times more productive than US in managing Type II Diabetes
Source: WHO GBD Report 2009; International Diabetes Federation - Diabetes Atlas, ADA, NHS
9
Health Care needs drive changes pricing and value assessment
Comparative effectiveness will be used to evaluate
value
Hypothesis Comments
Innovative agreements will become a more common and accepted approach
Innovative pricing models help industry and countries offer access for affordable medicine to appropriate patients
The UK, Australia and Germany are more advance in offering
Health care cost will be shifted to patients
Patients are needing to pay more – as full cash payers or in the form of copays – and demanding more
Tends to rewarded adherent patients with services and lower premiums in the US
In Turkey there are growing trends towards contribution to treatment
Providers may be asked for comparative data even post registration
Cost effectiveness evaluations will take into account all costs, not just those of drugs, providing room for cost-offset arguments
HTA used to assess the most appropriate population to benefit
Reimbursement can be conditional or increased on the provision of additional evidence
Restriction of reimbursement to subgroups of patients in which the price is justified
Reimbursement will be informed by Health
Technology Assessment
Ass
essi
ng
Val
ue
Pri
cin
g
10
Risk pooling empowers budget holders shifting inelastic demand towards elasticity
Price negotiations through risk pooling helps inelastic demand shifted towards elasticDemand from an insurance fund holder for 100 transplant a year
Price
DEMAND CURVE:Inelastic,
Unitary Elastic,Elastic,
n = -1
D
Quantity
InelasticInelastic
Unitary ElasticUnitary Elastic
ElasticElastic
?=?=
Perfectly inelastic demand: changes in the price do not affect the quantity demanded for the goodNeed for heart for transplant – no matter what the price is a person needs one
Relatively inelastic demand:when the change in quantity demanded is less than change in priceNeed for an antibiotic for a resistant bacteriaBudget Impact
Price elasticity of demand:responsiveness in the quantity demanded as a result of change in price
elastic if consumers will only pay a narrow range of prices – sugar
inelastic if consumers will pay almost any price for the product – water
11
Value Based – Risk sharing pricing framework
Financial contracting
models
Risk based models
Outcomes based models
• Reimbursement / pricing through financial arrangements- Price-volume agreements- Dynamic benefit schemes (rebate depending on market share targets)- Patient capitation and dose caps
• Different reimbursed price depending on patient sub-groups - by indication
- treatment history
- risk factors
• Different reimbursed price depending on patient outcomes- treatment response
- treatment outcome
Consumer oriented models
• Implementing differentiated pricing models by providing direct benefits to patients
Per
form
ance
Ori
ente
d M
od
els
12
Innovative Pricing approach help create win-win solutions Underlying goal of models similar, but differ in reimbursement price and scheme
Financial Contracting Models - Utilization
Outcomes Based Pricing Models
Risked Based Pricing Models
Price Volume Agreement: e.g. full reimbursement for first 10% of patients, reduced reimbursement for next 20% of patients, no reimburse-ment for all others
Initial 10% of patients
Next 20% of patients
All others
Full response
Partial response
No response
Money back guarantee, e.g. full reimbursement for responders, reduced reimbursement for partial responders, no reimburse-ment for non-responders
High Risk
Moderate risk
Low risk
Reimbursement linked to value and level of risk (e.g. based on diagnostic test)
Patient segments Patient segments Patient segments
13
Technology Assessment (TA) is a concept, which embraces different forms of policy analysis on the relation between science and technology on the one hand, and policy, society and the individual on the other hand. Technology Assessment typically includes policy analysis approaches such as foresight; economic analysis; systems analysis; strategic analysis etc. TA could make policy analysis about:
What is TA?
GMO and environment
Working conditions in the light of increasing
ICT work
The energy situation Privacy in e-governmentGlobalisation and labour
market competences
Potential of nanotechnology in
health care
Sources:http://www.eptanetwork.org/EPTA/what.php
Technology Assessment has three dimensions
•The cognitive dimension - creating overview on knowledge, relevant to policy-making
•The normative dimension - establishing dialogue in order to support opinion making
•The pragmatic dimension - establish processes that help decisions to be made
And TA has three objects
•The issue or technology
•The social aspects
•The policy aspects
14
1967 - Technology Assessment first used in the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and Development of the House Science and Astronautics Committee of the U.S. Congress
1972 - the U.S. Congress created the The Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) by Public Law 92–484. OTA provide analysis of the complex scientific and technical issues from 1972 to 1995
1987 - Scientific Technology Options Assessment (STOA)-an official organ of the European Parliament – started releasing reports partnering with external experts.
1990 - The European Parliamentary Technology Assessment Network-EPTA was formally established under the patronage of the President of the European Parliament to advise parliaments on the possible social, economic and environmental impact of new sciences and technologies. E.g. Working in future - structures and trends in industrial work , Vaccine capacity in the UK.
In 1973-1975 roots of Health Technology was established:
• the U.S. Academy of Sciences published a report that examined the implications of four health technologies: in vitro fertilization, choosing the sex of children, retardation of aging, and modifying human behavior
• The National Institutes of Health carried out a rather comprehensive assessment of the totally implantable artificial heart in 1973
• The Swedish Organization, Spri, carried out a cost-effectivenessanalysis of the computed tomography (CT) scanner (the first HTA outside of the US)
From TA to HTA
Sources: Banta. 2009;www.eptanetwork.org/EPTA/about.php; www.europarl.europa.eu/stoa/default_en.htm
15
Health Technology Assessment - HTA
HTA studies the medical, social, ethical, (legal) and economic implications of development, diffusion and use of technology and informs policy decision
Its aim is to improve quality and cost-effectiveness of healthcare
Health Technology
Health technology covers any method (intervention) used to promote health, prevent and treat disease and improve rehabilitation or long-term care
Health Technology Assessment is a tool for Decision Making and Priority Setting at Given Resources
Sources: Adapted from http://www.singhealth.com.sg/
Health Services and Health Systems
Rehabilitation Programme
Pharmaceuticals Medical Devices Surgical procedures
Preventive Programme
Policies no longer focused solely on cost-containment,
but achieving value for money
16
Criteria for HTA varies based on country perspective
CriteriaAT
BE CH DE FI FR NL NO SE UK
Therapeutic benefit X X X X X X X X X X
Patient benefit X X X X X X X X X X
Cost-effectiveness X X X X X X X
Budget impact X X X X X X
Pharmaceutical/innovative characteristics
X X X X X
Availability of therapeutic alternatives
X X X X
Equity considerations X X X
Public health impact X
R&D X
Sources: Sorenson 2008
17
Increasing interest in HTA across Asia Pacfollowing trends in the US and EuropeFormal HTA programs
Country – HTA HTA Body since
Australia – MSAC, PBAC
Non-Pharmaceuticals - the Medicare Services Advisory Committee (MSAC) since late 1998
Pharmaceuticals - the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) Mandatory economic evaluation since 1993
The Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures—Surgical (ASERNIP-S) since 1998
HTA at state government level within public hospitals
Taiwan – CDE
New Zealand Health Technology Assessment (NZHTA) since 1997
Source: Hailey D. 2009; Sivalal S. 2009; Chang-yup Kim, 2009; Teerawattananon Y. 2009
Thailand – HITAP
South Korea – HIRA
Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP) was established in 1996
HTA is actively used for policy decisions
An agency of the National Health Insurance (NHI), the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) is responsible for working-level benefit determination since 2000
HTA Center within HIRA was tasked to perform HTA in 2007 Plans to introduce new national independent organization for HTA and based
on the model of the NICE of the UK
New Zealand – NZHTA
Center for Drug Evaluation (CDE) - HTA division since 2007
18
Key Principles for the Improved Conduct of Health Technology Assessments for Resource Allocation Decisions
1. The goal and scope of the HTA should be explicit and relevant to its use
2. HTA should be an unbiased and transparent exercise
3. HTA should include all relevant technologies
4. A clear system for setting priorities for HTA should exist
5. HTA should incorporate appropriate methods for assessing costs and benefits
6. HTAs should consider a wide range of evidence and outcomes
7. A full societal perspective should be considered when undertaking HTAs
8. HTAs should explicitly characterize uncertainty surrounding estimates
Source: Sullivan S. Future Trends Workshop, Seoul 2008, Singapore 2009, Drummond 2008
From Future Trends Workshop 2008-2009
19
Key Principles for the Improved Conduct of Health Technology Assessments for Resource Allocation Decisions
9. HTAs should consider and address issues of generalizability and transferability
10. Those conducting HTAs should actively engage all key stakeholder groups
11. Those undertaking HTAs should actively seek all available data
12. The implementation of HTA findings needs to be monitored
13. HTA should be timely
14. HTA findings need to be communicated appropriately to different decision makers
15. The link between HTA findings and decision making processes needs to be in all transparent and clearly defined
Source: Sullivan S. Future Trends Workshop, Seoul 2008, Singapore 2009, Drummond 2008
Michael F. Drummond University of York, J. Sanford Schwartz University of Pennsylvania, Bengt Jonsson Stockholm School of Economics, Bryan R. Luce United BioSource Corporation, Peter J. Neumann Tufts University, Uwe Siebert UMIT—University for Health Sciences, Medical Informatics and Technology, Sean D. Sullivan University of Washington; International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 24:3 (2008), 244–258.
20
Key Principles for Improved Health Technology Assessment: Identify and inform organizational, procedural and methodological best practice
Source: Sullivan S. Future Trends Workshop, Singapore 2009; Neumann 2009 accepted for publication
Australia (PBAC), Brazil (ANVISA), Canada (CADTH), Germany (DAHTA@DIMDI, IQWiG), Korea (HIRA), Sweden (TLV, SBU), Taiwan (CDE), the United Kingdom (NICE), and United States (Blue Cross/Blue Shield, CMS, DERP, Wellpoint).
Many of the organizations support and implement certain principles, such as being explicit about their HTA goals and scope; considering a wide range of evidence and outcomes; and seeking all available data
Other principles, such as taking a full societal perspective; having a clear system for setting priorities; explicitly characterizing uncertainty surrounding estimates; monitoring the implementation of HTA findings; and considering the generalizability and transferability of results receive much less backing
There is also variation in the degree to which organizations incorporate appropriate methods for assessing costs and benefits
21
HTA systems: room for improvement
HTA’s role and utility in decision-making and priority-setting of health care systems and impact on innovation
Risk of using HTA as a cost-containment measure
HTA governance including transparency, accountability and stakeholder involvement in the HTA process
Stakeholder agreement on methods, evidence requirements and cost-effectiveness thresholds employed during the assessment process
Delays in the HTA process restricting patient access to treatments
22
Discussion pointsIssues? Resources? Knowledge Networks?
Despite the fact that Turkey is advanced on the equity dimension in Health Care, HTA has been relatively slow in gaining much of a foothold. What are the factors that play role in this? Political support? Capacity? Investment?
How to speed up capacity building in Turkey? Human resources? Resources in general? Network? What should be the role for stakeholders in capacity building?
What is the potential value of Information Centers and Knowledge Networks?
23
Information Centers and knowledge networks for HTAcan accelerate collaboration
International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA)• Accelerate exchange and collaboration among agencies
• Promote information sharing and comparison
• Prevent unnecessary duplication of activities.
HTA on the net; A Guide to Internet Sources of Information from Institute of Health Economics is a toolkit with links• specialized bibliographic databases relevant to the subject of the assessment;
• data from government and regulatory agencies;
• administrative databases;
• industry studies, and advice from experts in the field
NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED): published economic evaluations of health care interventions
Source: http://www.inahta.org/HTA/http://www.ihe.ca/publications/library/2008/health-technology-assessment-on-the-net-10th/