12
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Private Payers Disagree With Medicare Over Medical Device Coverage About Half The Time

      1 , 2 , 3 , 4
      Health Affairs
      Health Affairs (Project Hope)

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references7

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Sources of regional variation in Medicare Part D drug spending.

          Sources of regional variation in spending for prescription drugs under Medicare Part D are poorly understood, and such variation may reflect differences in health status, use of effective treatments, or selection of branded drugs over lower-cost generics.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Medicare's enduring struggle to define "reasonable and necessary" care.

            Medicare legislation mandates that the program not pay for items and services that are not "reasonable and necessary" - terms that are open to interpretation and easily politicized. In today's fiscal environment, "reasonable and necessary" warrants a closer look.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Medicare Is Scrutinizing Evidence More Tightly For National Coverage Determinations

              We examined Medicare national coverage determinations for medical interventions to determine whether or not they have become more restrictive over time. National coverage determinations address whether particular big-ticket medical items, services, treatment procedures, and technologies can be paid for under Medicare. We found that after we adjusted for the strength of evidence and other factors known to influence the determinations of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), the evidentiary bar for coverage has risen. More recent coverage determinations (from mid-March 2008 through August 2012) were twenty times less likely to be positive than earlier coverage determinations (from February 1999 through January 2002). Furthermore, coverage during the study period was increasingly and positively associated both with the degree of consistency of favorable findings in the CMS reviewed clinical evidence and with recommendations made in clinical guidelines. Coverage policy is an important payer tool for promoting the appropriate use of medical interventions, but CMS's rising evidence standards also raise questions about patients' access to new technologies and about hurdles for the pharmaceutical and device industries as they attempt to bring innovations to the market.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Health Affairs
                Health Affairs
                Health Affairs (Project Hope)
                0278-2715
                1544-5208
                August 2015
                August 2015
                : 34
                : 8
                : 1376-1382
                Affiliations
                [1 ] James D. Chambers ( ) is an investigator at the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, and an assistant professor of medicine in the School of Medicine, Tufts University, in Boston, Massachusetts.
                [2 ] Matthew Chenoweth is a research associate at the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center.
                [3 ] Teja Thorat is a senior research associate at the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center.
                [4 ] Peter J. Neumann is director of the Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, and a professor of medicine in the School of Medicine, Tufts University.
                Article
                10.1377/hlthaff.2015.0133
                26240252
                36312450-5db4-454f-a88b-97bf9d81e249
                © 2015
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article