Medical Devices Applying for Outpatient Medicare Supplemental Payments.

IF 9.5 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Osman Moneer, James L Johnston, Vinay K Rathi, Joseph S Ross, Sanket S Dhruva
{"title":"Medical Devices Applying for Outpatient Medicare Supplemental Payments.","authors":"Osman Moneer, James L Johnston, Vinay K Rathi, Joseph S Ross, Sanket S Dhruva","doi":"10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Medicare transitional pass-through payments (TPTPs) provide supplemental reimbursement that is intended to facilitate adoption of new devices in the outpatient setting. The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have historically evaluated manufacturer applications for TPTPs based on newness, cost, and evidence of substantial clinical improvement, ie, the traditional pathway. In 2020, CMS introduced an alternative pathway to allow US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-designated breakthrough devices to qualify for supplemental reimbursement without demonstrating substantial clinical improvement.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To characterize CMS TPTP approval rates and the premarket evidence used by FDA to support authorization of new outpatient medical devices considered for CMS TPTP.</p><p><strong>Design and setting: </strong>This was a cross-sectional study of TPTP applications for new outpatient medical devices from 2017 to 2023. Using the Federal Register, CMS Outpatient Prospective Payment System final rules for fiscal years 2017 through 2023 were obtained, from which all manufacturer applications for TPTPs were identified. For each application, the CMS TPTP review pathway (traditional/alternative), CMS final decision (award/deny), and FDA authorization pathway were assessed.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Characteristics of devices considered for CMS TPTPs and design, effectiveness end points, and patient demographic characteristics of premarket clinical studies used to support FDA authorization.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>CMS approved 17 of 43 (40%) applications for TPTPs, including all 8 (100%) alternative pathway applications for breakthrough devices and 9 of 35 applications (26%) using the traditional pathway. Devices approved for TPTPs were more likely to have been assessed in premarket clinical studies than devices denied TPTPs (12/17 [71%] vs 2/26 [8%]). Among the 14 premarket studies of TPTP-approved devices, 8 (57%) used surrogate markers as primary effectiveness end points and 5 (42%) did not meet all primary end points. The median (IQR) percentage of female, Black, and Hispanic patients among the trials that reported demographic data was 26% (17%-36%), 6% (2%-17%), and 4% (3%-5%), respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>The findings of this cross-sectional analysis indicated that CMS more commonly awarded supplemental outpatient payment through TPTPs for devices assessed in premarket clinical studies to support FDA authorization. However, these studies often lacked generalizability to Medicare beneficiaries, used surrogate markers of effectiveness, or did not meet all primary end points. As more breakthrough devices receive FDA authorization and effectively qualify for automatic supplemental payments, strengthening premarket clinical evidence requirements for CMS TPTP approvals would provide better information to guide clinical decision-making and ensure that supplemental reimbursement enhances care for Medicare beneficiaries.</p>","PeriodicalId":53180,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Health Forum","volume":"5 11","pages":"e244016"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11568453/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Health Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamahealthforum.2024.4016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance: Medicare transitional pass-through payments (TPTPs) provide supplemental reimbursement that is intended to facilitate adoption of new devices in the outpatient setting. The US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have historically evaluated manufacturer applications for TPTPs based on newness, cost, and evidence of substantial clinical improvement, ie, the traditional pathway. In 2020, CMS introduced an alternative pathway to allow US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-designated breakthrough devices to qualify for supplemental reimbursement without demonstrating substantial clinical improvement.

Objective: To characterize CMS TPTP approval rates and the premarket evidence used by FDA to support authorization of new outpatient medical devices considered for CMS TPTP.

Design and setting: This was a cross-sectional study of TPTP applications for new outpatient medical devices from 2017 to 2023. Using the Federal Register, CMS Outpatient Prospective Payment System final rules for fiscal years 2017 through 2023 were obtained, from which all manufacturer applications for TPTPs were identified. For each application, the CMS TPTP review pathway (traditional/alternative), CMS final decision (award/deny), and FDA authorization pathway were assessed.

Main outcomes and measures: Characteristics of devices considered for CMS TPTPs and design, effectiveness end points, and patient demographic characteristics of premarket clinical studies used to support FDA authorization.

Results: CMS approved 17 of 43 (40%) applications for TPTPs, including all 8 (100%) alternative pathway applications for breakthrough devices and 9 of 35 applications (26%) using the traditional pathway. Devices approved for TPTPs were more likely to have been assessed in premarket clinical studies than devices denied TPTPs (12/17 [71%] vs 2/26 [8%]). Among the 14 premarket studies of TPTP-approved devices, 8 (57%) used surrogate markers as primary effectiveness end points and 5 (42%) did not meet all primary end points. The median (IQR) percentage of female, Black, and Hispanic patients among the trials that reported demographic data was 26% (17%-36%), 6% (2%-17%), and 4% (3%-5%), respectively.

Conclusions and relevance: The findings of this cross-sectional analysis indicated that CMS more commonly awarded supplemental outpatient payment through TPTPs for devices assessed in premarket clinical studies to support FDA authorization. However, these studies often lacked generalizability to Medicare beneficiaries, used surrogate markers of effectiveness, or did not meet all primary end points. As more breakthrough devices receive FDA authorization and effectively qualify for automatic supplemental payments, strengthening premarket clinical evidence requirements for CMS TPTP approvals would provide better information to guide clinical decision-making and ensure that supplemental reimbursement enhances care for Medicare beneficiaries.

申请门诊医疗保险补充付款的医疗设备。
重要性:医疗保险过渡性直通付款(TPTPs)提供补充补偿,旨在促进新设备在门诊环境中的应用。美国联邦医疗保险和医疗补助服务中心(CMS)历来根据新产品、成本和实质性临床改善的证据来评估制造商的 TPTPs 申请,即传统途径。2020 年,CMS 引入了另一种途径,允许美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)指定的突破性器械在不证明实质性临床改善的情况下获得补充报销:目的:描述 CMS TPTP 批准率的特点,以及 FDA 用于支持 CMS TPTP 考虑的新门诊医疗器械授权的上市前证据:这是对2017年至2023年新门诊医疗器械TPTP申请的横断面研究。通过《联邦公报》,我们获得了 CMS 门诊病人预付费系统 2017 至 2023 财年的最终规则,并从中确定了所有制造商的 TPTPs 申请。对于每项申请,都对 CMS TPTP 审查途径(传统/替代)、CMS 最终决定(批准/拒绝)和 FDA 授权途径进行了评估:主要结果和衡量标准:CMS TPTPs 考虑的器械特征以及用于支持 FDA 授权的上市前临床研究的设计、有效性终点和患者人口特征:CMS批准了43项TPTPs申请中的17项(40%),包括所有8项(100%)突破性器械替代途径申请和35项传统途径申请中的9项(26%)。与被拒绝 TPTP 的器械相比,获准 TPTP 的器械更有可能在上市前接受临床研究评估(12/17 [71%] vs 2/26 [8%])。在 14 项 TPTP 批准器械的上市前研究中,8 项(57%)使用替代标记物作为主要有效性终点,5 项(42%)未达到所有主要终点。在报告了人口统计学数据的试验中,女性、黑人和西班牙裔患者所占比例的中位数(IQR)分别为 26% (17%-36%)、6% (2%-17%) 和 4% (3%-5%):这项横断面分析的结果表明,CMS 通常通过 TPTPs 为上市前临床研究评估的器械提供门诊补充付款,以支持 FDA 的授权。然而,这些研究往往缺乏对医疗保险受益人的普遍性,使用了替代的有效性指标,或未达到所有主要终点。随着越来越多的突破性器械获得 FDA 授权并有效符合自动补充付款的条件,加强对 CMS TPTP 批准的上市前临床证据要求将提供更好的信息来指导临床决策,并确保补充付款能够加强对医疗保险受益人的护理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
7.80%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: JAMA Health Forum is an international, peer-reviewed, online, open access journal that addresses health policy and strategies affecting medicine, health, and health care. The journal publishes original research, evidence-based reports, and opinion about national and global health policy. It covers innovative approaches to health care delivery and health care economics, access, quality, safety, equity, and reform. In addition to publishing articles, JAMA Health Forum also features commentary from health policy leaders on the JAMA Forum. It covers news briefs on major reports released by government agencies, foundations, health policy think tanks, and other policy-focused organizations. JAMA Health Forum is a member of the JAMA Network, which is a consortium of peer-reviewed, general medical and specialty publications. The journal presents curated health policy content from across the JAMA Network, including journals such as JAMA and JAMA Internal Medicine.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信