How medicare could use comparative effectiveness research in deciding on new coverage and reimbursement

Health Affairs

Volumn 29, Issue 10, 2010, Pages 1796-1804

  Pearson, Steven D ^a   Bach, Peter B ^b  

^a INSTITUTE FOR CLINICAL AND ECONOMIC REVIEW   (United States)

^b MEMORIAL SLOAN KETTERING CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; INSURANCE; MEDICARE; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; REIMBURSEMENT; UNITED STATES;

COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; INSURANCE COVERAGE; MEDICARE; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 79952115061     PISSN: 02782715     EISSN: 15445208     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.0623     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Orszag PR. Health care and the budget: issues and challenges for reform; statement before the U.S. Senate Committee on the Budget [Internet]. Washington (DC): Congressional Budget Office; 2007 Jun 21 [cited 2010 Aug 13]. Available from: http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/82xx/doc8255/06-21-HealthCareReform.pdf
2. Tunis SR. Why Medicare has not established criteria for coverage decisions. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(21): 2196-8.
3. Thorwarth WT. From concept to CPT code to compensation: how the payment system works. J Am Coll Radiol. 2004;1:48-53.
4. Raab GG, Parr DH. From medical invention to clinical practice: the reimbursement challenge facing new device procedures and technology- part 3: payment. J Am Coll Radiol. 2006;3:842-50.
5. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Medicare payment basics [Internet]. Washington (DC): Med- PAC; [cited 2010 Jun 3]. Available from: http://www.medpac.gov/payment_basics.cfm
6. Newhouse JP. Pricing the priceless: a health care conundrum. Cambridge (MA): MIT Press; 2002.
7. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Report to the Congress: Medicare payment policy [Internet]. Washington (DC): MedPAC; 2010 Mar [cited 2010 Jun 3]. Available from: http://www.medpac.gov/documents/Mar10_EntireReport.pdf
8. Medicare Payment Advisory Commission. Report to the Congress: reforming the delivery system [Internet]. Washington (DC): MedPAC; 2008 Jun [cited 2010 Jun 30]. p. 107-37. Available from: http://www.medpac.gov/documents/Jun08_EntireReport.pdf
9. Wilensky GR. Cost-effectiveness information: yes, it's important, but keep it separate, please! Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(12):967-8.
10. Pearson S. From better evidence to better care: using comparative effectiveness research to guide practice and policy. In: Implementing comparative effectiveness research: priorities, methods, and impact. Washington (DC): Brookings Institution; 2009 Jun 9 [cited 2010 Sep 13]. Available from: http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/events/2009/0609_health_care_cer/0609_health_care_cer.pdf
11. Saul S. Profits and questions on prostate cancer therapy. New York Times. 2006 Dec 1.
12. Konski A, Watkins-Bruner D, Feigenberg S, Hanlon A, Kulkarni S, Beck JR, et al. Using decision analysis to determine the cost-effectiveness of intensity-modulated radiation therapy in the treatment of intermediate risk prostate cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006;66(2):408-15.
13. Tunis SR, Pearson SD. Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare's "coverage with evidence development." Health Aff (Millwood). 2006;25(5):1218-30.