Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK.
Centre for Research on Health and Social Care Management (CERGAS), Universitá Bocconi, Milan, Italy.
Health Econ. 2022 Sep;31 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):179-194. doi: 10.1002/hec.4478. Epub 2022 Feb 26.
Health economists have written extensively on the design and implementation of coverage with evidence development (CED) schemes and have proposed theoretical frameworks based on cost-effectiveness modeling and value of information analysis. CED may aid decision-makers when there is uncertainty about the (cost-)effectiveness of a new health technology at the time of reimbursement. Medical devices are potential candidates for CED schemes, as regulatory regimes do not usually require the same level of efficacy and safety data normally needed for pharmaceuticals. The purpose of this research is to assess whether the actual practice of CED for medical devices in Europe meets the theoretical principles proposed by health economists and whether theory and practice can be more closely aligned. Based on decision-makers' perceptions of the challenges associated with CED schemes, plus examples from the schemes themselves, we discuss a series of proposals for assessing the desirability of schemes, their design, implementation, and evaluation. These proposals, while reflecting the practical challenges with developing CED programs, embody many of the principles suggested by economists and should support decision-makers in dealing with uncertainty about the real-world performance of devices.
健康经济学家在有证据开发(CED)计划的设计和实施方面进行了广泛的研究,并提出了基于成本效益建模和信息价值分析的理论框架。在报销时,新医疗技术的(成本)效果存在不确定性时,CED 可能有助于决策者做出决策。医疗器械是 CED 计划的潜在候选者,因为监管制度通常不需要与药品通常需要的相同水平的疗效和安全性数据。本研究旨在评估欧洲医疗器械 CED 的实际实践是否符合健康经济学家提出的理论原则,以及理论和实践是否可以更加紧密地结合。基于决策者对 CED 计划相关挑战的看法,以及计划本身的例子,我们讨论了一系列评估计划的可取性、设计、实施和评估的建议。这些建议虽然反映了开发 CED 计划的实际挑战,但体现了经济学家提出的许多原则,应该支持决策者应对设备实际性能不确定性。