Use of Comparative Effectiveness Analysis in Managed Care

Web Exclusives - Health Reform
Gene Reeder, RPh, PhD
Timothy S. Regan, BPharm, RPh, CPh
Executive Director
Strategic Accounts
Xcenda
Palm Harbor, FL

Rising costs pose a significant challenge to the US healthcare system. Congress, public and private payers, and other stakeholders have a significant interest in using comparative effectiveness research to control healthcare costs and support value-based purchasing. Policymakers continue to examine the framework for this research at the national level, while commercial payers are already comparing the effectiveness of products. Widespread use of comparative effectiveness data could have profound implications for manufacturers as well as the entire healthcare system.1

Figure 1
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 6

The following findings (Figures 1-6) represent responses from a panel of medical and pharmacy directors (N = 73) from national and regional health plans to a survey on the use of comparative effectiveness studies. The survey was conducted during the June 2008 Managed Care Network (MCN) meeting in Washington, DC.2

Notes

1. For more information see Xcenda/AmerisourceBergen Specialty Group Webcast, “Comparative effectiveness: emerging use with public and private payers and potential impact on manufacturers.” May 20, 2008. www.absgwebcasts.com/archive.cfm.

2. MCN is comprised of more than 100 medical and pharmacy directors representing more than 150 million covered lives. MCN conducts payer market research and provides strategic guidance to the pharmaceutical industry. In 2007, MCN became a part of Xcenda/AmerisourceBergen Specialty Group. See www.mcnweb.com.

Related Items
Healthcare Costs Among Patients with Excessive Sleepiness Associated with Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Shift Work Disorder, or Narcolepsy
Rashad Carlton, PharmD, MSPH, Cathryn A. Carroll, PhD, Orsolya Lunacsek, PhD, Timothy S. Regan, BPharm, RPh, CPh
September 2014 Vol 7, No 6 published on September 23, 2014 in Business
Yet Another Blow to the Medicaid Expansion
Igor Gorlach, JD, MPH, Ross D. Margulies, JD, MPH
September 2013, Vol 6, No 7 published on October 2, 2013 in Health Reform
FDA Expected to Approve Surrogate End Point for Neoadjuvant Breast Cancer Trials
Caroline Helwick
August 2013 Vol 6, No 6 Special Issue published on August 22, 2013 in Health Reform
The New Accountable Care Organizations and Medicare Gain-Sharing Program
Kip Piper, MA, FACHE
July/August 2010, Vol 3, No 4 published on August 19, 2010 in Health Reform
The Impact of Healthcare Reform on Payers’ Products, Provider Reimbursement, and Member Engagement
Sam Muppalla, Robert Capobianco
July/August 2010, Vol 3, No 4 published on August 19, 2010 in Health Reform
Last modified: February 14, 2019
  •  Association for Value-Based Cancer Care
  • Oncology Practice Management
  • Value-Based Cancer Care
  • Value-Based Care in Rheumatology
  • Rheumatology Practice Management
  • Urology Practice Management
  • Lynx CME