Tufts Medical Center, Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Boston, MA.
National Pharmaceutical Council.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2021 Aug;27(8):1067-1076. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2021.27.8.1067.
Despite increased financial contributions towards care, consumers' role in shaping their insurance benefits is unclear. To examine the role played by patient input when US commercial health plans formulate specialty drug coverage policies, along with the benefits and challenges of considering this input. We employed a parallel, mixed-methods approach. First, we reviewed health plans' policy development processes as reported on their websites. Second, we reviewed a data set of private health plan coverage decisions for specialty drugs and examined whether the evidence cited in policies included patient-reported outcomes (eg, health-related quality of life endpoints) and patient-based methodological designs (eg, interviews or surveys of patients). Third, we performed a survey (N = 21 respondents) and interviews (N = 5 interviewees) with plan decision-makers to determine the current role of patient input in plan decision-making, and the benefits and challenges of incorporating this data when formulating specialty drug coverage policies. We found that plans do not commonly solicit patient input when developing coverage policies, with only two instances of limited interaction between plans and patients or members. 1,316 (9%) of the studies plans cited in their specialty drug coverage policies included at least one patient-reported endpoint, and 0.4% (N = 62) used a patient-based methodological design. Of studies with patient-based designs, 40 used interviews, 26 included surveys/questionnaires, and one concerned shared decision-making (design categories not mutually exclusive). Almost half of the survey respondents reported having never engaged with patients or members when developing coverage policies. Among respondents who had engaged with patients or members, most reported doing so only rarely. The survey and interviews highlighted various benefits of soliciting patient input, including the value of obtaining a humanistic perspective, and several challenges, including resource requirements and the quality of obtained information. We found a notable lack of patient and member engagement by commercial health plans when formulating drug coverage policies. Survey respondents and interviewees identified benefits of accounting for patients' and plan members' values and preferences in specialty drug coverage policies, but also reported a number of important challenges to doing so. National Pharmaceutical Council provided funding for this research.
尽管医疗保健的财政投入有所增加,但消费者在塑造其保险福利方面的作用尚不清楚。本研究旨在探讨当美国商业健康计划制定专科药物覆盖政策时,患者投入所扮演的角色,以及考虑这种投入的益处和挑战。我们采用了平行的混合方法。首先,我们审查了网站上报告的健康计划政策制定过程。其次,我们审查了一组私人健康计划专科药物覆盖决策的数据,并检查政策中引用的证据是否包括患者报告的结果(例如,健康相关生活质量终点)和基于患者的方法学设计(例如,患者访谈或调查)。第三,我们对计划决策者进行了调查(N = 21 名受访者)和访谈(N = 5 名受访者),以确定患者投入在计划决策中的当前作用,以及在制定专科药物覆盖政策时纳入这些数据的益处和挑战。我们发现,计划在制定覆盖政策时通常不会征求患者的意见,只有两个计划与患者或成员之间的有限互动实例。在其专科药物覆盖政策中引用的研究计划中,有 1316 项(9%)至少包括一个患者报告的终点,而 0.4%(N = 62)使用了基于患者的方法学设计。在具有基于患者的设计的研究中,40 项使用了访谈,26 项包括调查/问卷,一项涉及共同决策(设计类别不互斥)。近一半的调查受访者表示,在制定覆盖政策时从未与患者或成员接触过。在与患者或成员接触过的受访者中,大多数人表示仅偶尔这样做。调查和访谈突出了征求患者意见的各种益处,包括获得人文视角的价值,以及一些挑战,包括资源需求和所获得信息的质量。我们发现商业健康计划在制定药物覆盖政策时明显缺乏患者和成员的参与。调查受访者和访谈对象确定了在专科药物覆盖政策中考虑患者和计划成员的价值观和偏好的益处,但也报告了这样做的一些重要挑战。国家药物理事会为这项研究提供了资金。