Kimberly Westrich, MA, of the National Pharmaceutical Council, explained how she envisions value assessment tools to be used in the US health care system in coming years.
Kimberly Westrich, MA, chief strategic officer at the National Pharmaceutical Council (NPC), discussed the future of value assessment tools in the US health care system. In her role, she provides strategic guidance to NPC’s policy research and communications activities, leads several research initiatives across NPC’s portfolio, and mentors NPC researchers and fellows.
Transcript
How do you envision the future of value assessment tools in the US health care system? What trends do you expect to shape the field in coming years?
This brings to mind an interesting conversation that's been happening for a few years. I don't think it's going to be settled soon, but there's been ongoing conversations about whether or not we need a national value assessment, or health technology assessment, body here in the United States. Outside of the United States, there are many countries that have a single health technology assessment body, and that makes sense because, outside of the United States, there's often centralized health insurance provided by the government; of course, here in the United States, we've got a decentralized system.
That said, there are many people who think that it would still be useful to have a centralized health technology assessment body, and there's been recent conversations looking at CMS and some of the things that CMS is doing related to, for example, coverage with evidence development for Alzheimer's disease, or getting involved in Medicare drug price negotiation. There are people who think, "Well, CMS is already starting to do some things that seem to be consistent with value assessment, and should CMS be a value assessment body?" There's people on both sides of the issue, some people think that CMS should be leaning into that, some people say, "This is not a direction for CMS, it would be biting off more than it can chew, and if we did have a health assessment body here in the United States, it shouldn't be CMS."
We [Cencora] actually added some questions to our Managed Care Network survey this year to see if payers in the United States have an appetite for a national health assessment body, and, if so, what they might want that body to do. Surprisingly, 85% of payers were interested in having a national value assessment body. There was sort of a split between whether they wanted it to be government funded, that was about 50% of payers. Then, 40% were interested in a split between government and private funding so that you had funding coming from multiple sources; it wasn't beholden to just one part of the economy.
The interesting data was when we asked about what this value assessment body might do, 85% of the respondents were interested in having a value assessment body that looked at best practices and standards, really understanding, what does good value assessment look like? Seven out of 10 (this was a multiple response question) were interested in having a national HTA [health technology assessment] body that looked at quality value assessment reports that were conducted by others. For example, if ICER [the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review] does a value assessment report, this national assessment body could look at it and say whether or not it was of good quality. So, that was something that was very interesting to payers, as well. Then, a lower percentage, but still noteworthy, I think, closer to 6 in 10 were interested in a national assessment body that did conduct its own value assessment. So, there's most interest in what does good look like? Is this report an example of good? Then, still interest, but lesser interest, in conducting value assessments.
Still, when you step back and you look at all of that together, here, I think there is interest in getting more value assessment information by US payers, I don't think there's interest in prescriptive value assessment information, or something that says, "This is how this should be used." Here in the United States, we're always interested in having more information, more is better, but we don't want someone to tell us exactly how to use that information in a prescriptive way.
This transcript has been lightly edited for clarity.
New Research Challenges Assumptions About Hospital-Physician Integration, Medicare Patient Mix
April 22nd 2025On this episode of Managed Care Cast, Brady Post, PhD, lead author of a study published in the April 2025 issue of The American Journal of Managed Care®, challenges the claim that hospital-employed physicians serve a more complex patient mix.
Listen
Tailored Dosing for MM Matters More Than Drug Count: Ajai Chari, MD
April 25th 2025When it comes to treating multiple myeloma (MM), Ajai Chari, MD, argued that more is not always better. More intense treatment regimens, or those with more drugs, don't necessarily guarantee better outcomes.
Read More
Personalized Care Key as Tirzepatide Use Expands Rapidly
April 15th 2025Using commercial insurance claims data and the US launch of tirzepatide as their dividing point, John Ostrominski, MD, Harvard Medical School, and his team studied trends in the use of both glucose-lowering and weight-lowering medications, comparing outcomes between adults with and without type 2 diabetes.
Listen
Science at AACR Aims to Overcome Cancer Care Barriers
April 24th 2025A program cochair said the agenda was designed to get attendees "out of their comfort zone." The Amercian Association for Cancer Research annual meeting runs April 25-30, with the key presentations coming Sunday through Tuesday.
Read More
Top Pharmacy Leaders to Convene at Asembia’s AXS25 Summit in Las Vegas
April 24th 2025Asembia's AXS25 Summit will unite more than 8000 key decision-makers to explore pharmacy innovation, artificial intelligence, policy, and patient care from April 27 to May 1 at Wynn & Encore in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Read More