Assessing Value: Promise and Pitfalls Conference Summary Report
At NPC's conference, Assessing Value: Promise and Pitfalls, top experts in their fields united to discuss value assessment as it impacts payers, patients, providers and pharmaceutical innovators.
Monday, November 21, 2016
NPC brought together health care stakeholders on Sept. 29, 2016, to examine one of the most critical issues in health care: how to measure the value of a medical treatment and its impact on patient care. After top experts in their fields united to discuss value assessment as it impacts payers, patients, providers and pharmaceutical innovators, NPC is pleased to present the conference summary book from Assessing Value: Promise and Pitfalls, providing a path forward to move value assessment frameworks from fledgling to functional.
During the conference, we shared research that evaluated how existing frameworks align with NPC’s Guiding Practices for Patient-Centered Value Assessment and explored the variable outputs from multiple myeloma treatment assessments conducted using four different frameworks. A broad range of stakeholders shared their perspectives on the research, uncovering the lessons learned to date, and how best to advance the field of value assessment.
The conference report includes:
- Framing the Discussion: Robert (Bobby) W. Dubois, MD, PhD, NPC executive vice president and chief science officer, opened the conference exploring two main questions: Why is assessing value in health care important, and why is it important to do it right?
- Moving Value Frameworks from Fledgling to Functional: Cliff Goodman, PhD, senior vice president and director of the Center for Comparative Effectiveness Research at the Lewin Group, headed a team that evaluated how the five major value assessment frameworks align with NPC’s Guiding Practices for Patient-Centered Value Assessment and presented their findings.
- Why Four Frameworks (Should) Arrive at Different Conclusions: A Case Study of Multiple Myeloma Reviews: Dr. Goodman also presented results from research that compared how four existing value assessment frameworks reviewed treatments for multiple myeloma. Given the variety of inputs and methodologies, each framework arrived at different results.
- Panel Discussions: Stakeholders from a variety of fields, including framework creators, patient organizations, payers and health care administrators, came together to share their perspectives on the research, uncovering the lessons learned to date, and how best to advance the field of value assessment.
- Closing Remarks: At the end of the day, Dr. Goodman and Dr. Dubois noted that there is still much work to be done in the evolution of value frameworks, especially if they are meant to be tools that will help health care decision-makers.