The US healthcare system is transitioning from a volume- to a value-based reimbursement payment structure. Assigning value continues to be a difficult and complex process. In a new article, the authors discuss IVI (Innovation and Value Initiative), founded in 2016, and ICER (the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review), founded in 2016. While both organizations seek to assign value in a methodological manner, they differ when it comes to patient-centricity, assessment flexibility, and transparency.
The authors note, “With the rise in high-cost treatments and growing emphasis on value-based healthcare, value assessment frameworks (VAFs) have been increasing in prominence in the United States (US). These frameworks have been recently evolving to better reflect the input of patients and various other stakeholders. Two well-known VAFs, the Institute for Clinical and Economic Review (ICER) and Innovation and Value Initiative (IVI), have both recently refined their methods in this regard; however, there remain notable differences in terms of how thoroughly their analyses reflect multistakeholder perceptions of value.” Read more here.
(Source: Charley Hallock, PharmD & Robin Tan, PhD, AmerisourceBergen Xcenda, 2/25/21)