Value to Whom? The Patient Voice in the Value Discussion

Professional societies and other organizations have recently taken a visible role trying to define treatment value via value frameworks and assessments, providing payer or provider recommendations, and potentially impacting patient access. Patient perspectives routinely differ from those of other st...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Value in health Vol. 20; no. 2; pp. 286 - 291
Main Authors: Perfetto, Eleanor M., Oehrlein, Elisabeth M., Boutin, Marc, Reid, Sarah, Gascho, Eric
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: United States Elsevier Inc 01.02.2017
Elsevier Science Ltd
Subjects:
Clinical Decision-Making
Clinical outcomes
Decision making
Evaluation
Feedback
Humans
Internal Medicine
Models, Theoretical
Patient care planning
Patient communication
Patient Outcome Assessment
Patient Preference
Patient-Centered Care
Patients
Peer review
Preferences
Stakeholders
Transparency
Value
Value-Based Purchasing
patient preference
clinical decision making
patient-centered care
patient outcome assessment
decision making
ISSN:1098-3015, 1524-4733
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Professional societies and other organizations have recently taken a visible role trying to define treatment value via value frameworks and assessments, providing payer or provider recommendations, and potentially impacting patient access. Patient perspectives routinely differ from those of other stakeholders. Yet, it is not always apparent that patients were engaged in value framework development or assessment. To describe the development and content of the National Health Council’s (NHC’s) Rubric, a tool that includes criteria for evaluation of value frameworks specifically with regard to patient-centeredness and meaningful patient engagement. The NHC held a multistakeholder, invitational roundtable in Washington, DC, in 2016. Participants reviewed existing patient-engagement rubrics, discussed experiences with value frameworks, debated and thematically grouped hallmark patient-centeredness characteristics, and developed illustrative examples of the characteristics. These materials were organized into the rubric, and subsequently vetted via multistakeholder peer review. The resulting rubric describes six domains of patient-centered value frameworks: partnership, transparency, inclusiveness, diversity, outcomes, and data sources. Each domain includes specific examples illustrating how patient engagement and patient-centeredness can be operationalized in value framework processes. The NHC multistakeholder roundtable’s recommendations are captured in the NHC’s Rubric to assess value framework and model patient-centeredness and patient engagement. The Rubric is a tool that will be refined over time on the basis of feedback from patient, patient group, framework developer, and other stakeholder-use experiences.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 14
content type line 23
ISSN:1098-3015
1524-4733
DOI:10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.014