Patient and Payer Preferences for Additional Value Criteria.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Jakab I
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8263917 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundTotal ankle arthroplasty (TAA), first developed as an alternative to ankle arthrodesis, has become an increasingly popular management option for end-stage ankle arthritis. Prior studies have shown commercial insurance payers base their coverage criteria on limited and low level of evidence research. This study aims to quantify and describe the evidence insurance companies use to support TAA coverage policies.MethodsThe top 11 national commercial health insurance payers for TAA were identified. A google search was performed to identify payer coverage policies. Policy documents were examined and cited references were classified by type of reference as well as reviewed for level of evidence (LOE). Specific coverage criteria for each individual payer were then extracted. Criteria were compared to assess for similarities among commercial payers. Finally, all references cited by each payer were examined to determine whether they mentioned the specific payer criteria.ResultsSix of the 11 payers had accessible coverage policies. The majority of cited references were primary journal articles (145, 60.9%) and the majority of references cited (179, 75.2%) were level III or level IV evidence. We found significant homogeneity in coverage criteria among payers. In addition, cited sources inconsistently mentioned specific payer coverage criteria.ConclusionThis study demonstrates that commercial insurance payers rely on the relatively low level of currently available scientific evidence when formulating coverage policies for TAA use and adopt criteria that have not been thoroughly analyzed in the literature. More high level of evidence research is needed to help clinicians and insurance companies further refine indications for TAA so that patients who might benefit from the procedure are adequately covered.Level of evidenceLevel IV, review.
| S-EPMC10962051 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The need for patient engagement has been recognized by regulatory agencies, but there is no consensus about how to operationalize this. One approach is the formal elicitation and use of patient preferences for weighing clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to demonstrate how patient preferences can be used to weigh clinical outcomes when both preferences and clinical outcomes are uncertain by applying a probabilistic value-based multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method. Probability distributions were used to model random variation and parameter uncertainty in preferences, and parameter uncertainty in clinical outcomes. The posterior value distributions and rank probabilities for each treatment were obtained using Monte-Carlo simulations. The probability of achieving the first rank is the probability that a treatment represents the highest value to patients. We illustrated our methodology for a simplified case on six HIV treatments. Preferences were modeled with normal distributions and clinical outcomes were modeled with beta distributions. The treatment value distributions showed the rank order of treatments according to patients and illustrate the remaining decision uncertainty. This study demonstrated how patient preference data can be used to weigh clinical evidence using MCDA. The model takes into account uncertainty in preferences and clinical outcomes. The model can support decision makers during the aggregation step of the MCDA process and provides a first step toward preference-based personalized medicine, yet requires further testing regarding its appropriate use in real-world settings.
| S-EPMC5306398 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To describe the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on clinical, other patient-reported, and economic outcomes. We conducted a systematic literature review using Medline/PubMed, limited to original articles published between 2011 and 2021 in English and Spanish, and focused on the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring on cancer patients. We identified 16 reports that deal with the benefit of patient-reported symptom monitoring (collected mostly electronically) on different outcomes. Five studies showed that patient-reported symptom surveillance led to significantly improved survival compared with usual care-mainly through better symptom control, early detection of tumor recurrence, and extended chemotherapy use. Additionally, three evaluations demonstrated an improvement in Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) associated with this monitoring strategy, specifically by reducing symptom severity. Additionally, six studies observed that this monitoring approach prevented unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions, leading to a substantial decrease in healthcare usage. There is consistent evidence across the studies that patient-reported symptom monitoring might entail a substantial survival benefit for cancer patients, better HRQoL, and a considerable decrease in healthcare usage. Nonetheless, more studies should be conducted to demonstrate their effectiveness in addition to their cost-effectiveness in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC8469093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Importance:While symptomatic vitreomacular interface abnormalities (VIAs) are common, assessment of vision preference values and treatment preferences of these may guide treatment recommendations by physicians and influence third-party payers. Objective:To determine preference values that individuals with VIA assign to their visual state and preferences of potential treatments. Design, Setting, and Participants:In this cross-sectional one-time questionnaire study conducted between December 2015 and January 2017, 213 patients from tertiary care referral centers in Thailand, the United Kingdom, and the United States were studied. Patients with symptomatic VIA diagnosed within 1 year of data collection, visual acuity less than 20/20 OU, and symptoms ascribed to VIAs were included. Data were analyzed from January 2017 to November 2017. Main Outcomes and Measures:The primary end points were overall mean preference value that individuals with VIA assigned to their visual state and patients' preferences for potential treatments. Preference values were graded on a scale from 0 to 1, with 0 indicating death and 1 indicating perfect health with perfect vision. Results:Of the 213 included patients, 139 (65.3%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 65.6 (7.7) years. Diagnoses included epiretinal membrane (n = 100 [46.9%]), macular hole (n = 99 [46.5%]), and vitreomacular traction (n = 14 [6.6%]). The mean (SD) vision preference value was 0.76 (0.15), without differences identified among the 3 VIA types. More participants were enthusiastic about vitrectomy (150 [71.1%]) compared with intravitreal injection (120 [56.9%]) (difference, 14.2%; 95% CI, 5.16-23.3; P = .002). Adjusted analyses showed enthusiasm for vitrectomy was associated with fellow eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 10.99; 95% CI, 2.01-59.97; P = .006) and better-seeing eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 0.03; 95% CI, 0.001-0.66; P = .03). Overall enthusiasm for treatment was associated with fellow eye visual acuity (odds ratio, 7.22; 95% CI, 1.29-40.40; P = .02). Overall, most participants (171 [81.0%]) were enthusiastic about surgery, injection, or both. Conclusions and Relevance:Study participants reported similar preference values among 3 types of VIAs. The data suggest that most patients with these conditions would be enthusiastic about undergoing vitrectomy or an injection to treat it, likely because of the condition's effect on visual functioning, although there may be a slight preference for vitrectomy at this time.
| S-EPMC6145775 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose. Assess patient preferences for aspects of breast cancer treatments to evaluate and inform the usual assumptions in scoring rubrics for value frameworks. Methods. A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) was designed and implemented to collect quantitative evidence on preferences from 100 adult female patients with a self-reported physician diagnosis of stage 3 or stage 4 breast cancer. Respondents were asked to evaluate some of the treatment aspects currently considered in value frameworks. Respondents' choices were analyzed using logit-based regression models that produced preference weights for each treatment aspect considered. Aggregate- and individual-level preferences were used to assess the relative importance of treatment aspects and their variability across respondents. Results. As expected, better clinical outcomes were associated with higher preference weights. While life extensions with treatment were considered to be most important, respondents assigned great value to out-of-pocket cost of treatment, treatment route of administration, and the availability of reliable tests to help gauge treatment efficacy. Two respondent classes were identified in the sample. Differences in class-specific preferences were primarily associated with route of administration, out-of-pocket treatment cost, and the availability of a test to gauge treatment efficacy. Only patient cancer stage was found to be correlated with class assignment (P = 0.035). Given the distribution of individual-level preference estimates, preference for survival benefits are unlikely to be adequately described with two sets of preference weights. Conclusions. Although value frameworks are an important step in the systematic evaluation of medications in the context of a complex treatment landscape, the frameworks are still largely driven by expert judgment. Our results illustrate issues with this approach as patient preferences can be heterogeneous and different from the scoring weights currently provided by the frameworks.
| S-EPMC7297494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Introduction: Gene therapies are innovative therapies that are increasingly being developed. However, health technology assessment (HTA) and payer decision making on these therapies is impeded by uncertainties, especially regarding long-term outcomes. Through measuring patient preferences regarding gene therapies, the importance of unique elements that go beyond health gain can be quantified and inform value assessments. We designed a study, namely the Patient preferences to Assess Value IN Gene therapies (PAVING) study, that can inform HTA and payers by investigating trade-offs that adult Belgian hemophilia A and B patients are willing to make when asked to choose between a standard of care and gene therapy. Methods and Analysis: An eight-step approach was taken to establish the protocol for this study: (1) stated preference method selection, (2) initial attributes identification, (3) stakeholder (HTA and payer) needs identification, (4) patient relevant attributes and information needs identification, (5) level identification and choice task construction, (6) educational tool design, (7) survey integration, and (8) piloting and pretesting. In the end, a threshold technique survey was designed using the attributes "Annual bleeding rate," "Chance to stop prophylaxis," "Time that side effects have been studied," and "Quality of Life." Ethics and Dissemination: The Medical Ethics Committee of UZ KU Leuven/Research approved the study. Results from the study will be presented to stakeholders and patients at conferences and in peer-reviewed journals. We hope that results from the PAVING study can inform decision makers on the acceptability of uncertainties and the value of gene therapies to patients.
| S-EPMC7985056 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: Increasingly, multi-criteria decision analysis has gained importance as a method by which to assess the value of orphan drugs. However, very little attention has been given to the weight (relative preferences) of the individual criteria used in a framework. Aims: This study sought to gain an understanding of the preferential weights that should be allocated in a multi-criteria decision analysis framework for orphan drugs, from a multi-stakeholder perspective. Method: Using key MCDA criteria for orphan drugs reported in the literature, we developed an interactive web-based survey tool to capture preferences for different criteria from a general stakeholder sample who were requested to assign weights from a reimbursement perspective. Each criterion could be assigned a weight on a sliding scale from 0 to 100% as long as the sum of all the criteria was 100%. We subsequently used the interactive tool with an expert focus group, followed up with a group discussion regarding each criterion and their perspectives on the weight that each criterion should be allocated when assessing an orphan drug. The expert focus group participants were then able to adjust their weights, if the group discussion had changed their perspectives. Results: The interactive tool was completed by 120 general stakeholder sample from a wide range of countries and professional backgrounds and an expert focus group of ten members. The results showed the differences in perspectives on the importance of criteria. Both groups considered Treatment efficacy to be the most important criterion. The general stakeholder sample weighted Treatment safety at 12.03% compared to the expert focus group's average of 20%. The results also demonstrated the value of the group discussion, which provided additional insights into the perspectives on the importance of criteria in assessing orphan drugs. Conclusion: This study aimed to contribute to the important aspect of preferences for different criteria in MCDA. This study sheds light on the important aspect of the preferences of the different criteria. All respondents agreed on the relative importance of Treatment efficacy and Treatment safety, criteria that are captured in conventional cost-effectiveness studies, but they also expressed the view that in addition to those, several disease-related and drug-related criteria should be included in MCDA frameworks for assessing orphan drugs.
| S-EPMC7225315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: The learning preferences of ophthalmology patients were examined. METHODS: Results from a voluntary survey of ophthalmology patients were analyzed for education preferences and for correlation with race, age, and ophthalmic topic. RESULTS: To learn about eye disease, patients preferred one-on-one sessions with providers as well as printed materials and websites recommended by providers. Patients currently learning from the provider were older (average age 59 years), and patients learning from the Internet (average age 49 years) and family and friends (average age 51 years) were younger. Patients interested in cataracts, glaucoma, macular degeneration, and dry eye were older; patients interested in double vision and glasses were younger. There were racial differences regarding topic preferences, with Black patients most interested in glaucoma (46%), diabetic retinopathy (31%), and cataracts (28%) and White patients most interested in cataracts (22%), glaucoma (22%), and macular degeneration (19%). CONCLUSION: MOST OPHTHALMOLOGY PATIENTS PREFERRED PERSONALIZED EDUCATION: one-on-one with their provider or a health educator and materials (printed and electronic) recommended by their provider. Age-related topics were more popular with older patients, and diseases with racial risk factors were more popular with high risk racial groups.
| S-EPMC4011899 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare low-value health service use among commercially insured and Medicare populations and explore the influence of payer type on the provision of low-value care.Data sources2009-2011 national Medicare and commercial insurance administrative data.DesignWe created claims-based algorithms to measure seven Choosing Wisely-identified low-value services and examined the correlation between commercial and Medicare overuse overall and at the regional level. Regression models explored associations between overuse and regional characteristics.MethodsWe created measures of early imaging for back pain, vitamin D screening, cervical cancer screening over age 65, prescription opioid use for migraines, cardiac testing in asymptomatic patients, short-interval repeat bone densitometry (DXA), preoperative cardiac testing for low-risk surgery, and a composite of these.Principal findingsPrevalence of four services was similar across the insurance-defined groups. Regional correlation between Medicare and commercial overuse was high (correlation coefficient = 0.540-0.905) for all measures. In both groups, similar region-level factors were associated with low-value care provision, especially total Medicare spending and ratio of specialists to primary care physicians.ConclusionsLow-value care appears driven by factors unrelated to payer type or anticipated reimbursement. These findings suggest the influence of local practice patterns on care without meaningful discrimination by payer type.
| S-EPMC5867100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo identify patient preferences for notification of sexual contacts when a sexually transmitted infection (STI) is diagnosed.MethodsA questionnaire survey of 2544 patients attending three large genitourinary clinics at Derby, Birmingham, and Coventry in the United Kingdom.ResultsThe median age of the respondents was 24 with 1474 (57.9%) women, 1835 (72.1%) white, 1826 (71.8%) single. The most favoured method of partner notification was patient referral, which was rated a "good" method by 65.8% when they had to be contacted because a sexual partner has an STI. Notifying contacts by letter as a method of provider partner notification is more acceptable than phoning, text messaging, or email. Respondents with access to mobile telephones, private emails, and private letters were more likely to rate a method of partner notification using that mode of communication as "good" compared to those without. With provider referral methods of partner notification respondents preferred to receive a letter, email, or text message asking them to contact the clinic rather than a letter, email or text message informing them that they may have an STI.ConclusionMost respondents think that being informed directly by a partner is the best method of being notified of the risk of an STI. Some of the newer methods may not be acceptable to all but a significant minority of respondents prefer these methods of partner notification. The wording of letters, emails, or text messages when used for partner notification has an influence on the acceptability of the method and may influence success of the partner notification method. Services should be flexible enough to utilise the patients' preferred method of partner notification.
| S-EPMC2564722 | biostudies-literature