What Values Should Count in Value Based Pricing for the NHS - UCL

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Patient Productivity Orphan Drugs Political Drivers National Priority Area International Comparison Inter‐Departmental Comparison Budget Impact Uncertainty of outcome Stakeholder persuasion Cross‐Departmental Effects 30
The Pfizer List of Values • Absolute health gain / therapeutic improvement, to individual patients and carer/dependents – Life years gained – QoL gained • Relative improvement – Severity (baseline/final/alternative QoL level) – Avoiding sudden death (EoL and rule of rescue) – Avoiding premature death (fair innings) • Seemingly supported by new Outcomes Framework, but illegal? – Availability of (any/suitable) alternative therapy • Patient preference – Process of care (eg; convenience, dignity, private cost) – Nature of condition/health outcomes (eg; cancer dread, HIV stigma, ‘lifestyle’ drugs) • Population characteristics – Disadvantaged socio‐economic – Children – Immigrants – Responsibility (eg; smokers) • Societal perspective – Patient productivity – NHS priority TA – International comparison • Industry and UK Plc – Innovation in generic, orphan markets – Dynamic efficiency • Quality of evidence and certainty • Affordable and implementable VI.A. Common Ground and Significant Differences Our preliminary account differs from the Pfizer model in some respects, although there are many similarities. Our groupings of considerations are not the same, and the individual criteria are in some cases different. The comparison is set out under the following headings: (i) Common Ground (ii) Significant Differences. No comment is made where the differences are insignificant or terminological. VI.A.1. Common Ground It is no surprise that both lists give priority to factors already commonly used: Life years gained i.e.; LY of QALY Health improvement i.e.; QoL, or QA of QALY In both studies priority is also given to the following additional factors: Impact on carers ie; 3 rd ‐party well‐being Severity weighting ie; a QA adjuster. Avoiding sudden death/Life saving ie; LY adjusters. 31
Page 1 and 2: What Values Should Count in HTA for
Page 3 and 4: IV.C. Category III: Industrial ....
Page 5 and 6: This paper does not attempt to addr
Page 7 and 8: II.B. Technical literature from dec
Page 9 and 10: Health and Quality of Life Gains in
Page 11 and 12: important elements of health states
Page 13 and 14: educe such impact, is an enlightene
Page 15 and 16: IV.B. Category II: Prioritized Subg
Page 17 and 18: therefore, good reason to include t
Page 19 and 20: Summary judgement on inclusion: Amb
Page 21 and 22: Reasons for exclusion: i) It is not
Page 23 and 24: presumed increased tax revenue) act
Page 25 and 26: IV.D.2.International Comparison Def
Page 27 and 28: ii) iii) Such a consideration opens
Page 29: framework. The remaining challenge
Page 33 and 34: There are many clear cases where a
Page 35 and 36: question as to whether people will
Page 37 and 38: References Baker, R, Bateman, I, Do

What Values Should Count in Value Based Pricing for the NHS - UCL

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?