Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2014 Aug;20(8):641-8.

Potential role of network meta-analysis in value-based insurance design

Affiliations
  • PMID: 25295678
Free article

Potential role of network meta-analysis in value-based insurance design

James D Chambers et al. Am J Manag Care. 2014 Aug.
Free article

Abstract

Objectives: Value-based insurance design (V-BID) has emerged as an approach to improve health outcomes and contain healthcare costs by encouraging use of high-value care. We estimated the impact of a V-BID for osteoporosis treatments using comparative effectiveness evidence and real-world data from a California health insurance plan to estimate the benefits of the design's implementation.

Methods: This study consisted of 4 steps. First, we reviewed randomized clinical trials including osteoporosis treatments-alendronate, ibandronate, risedronate, raloxifene, and teriparatide-reported in a recent Agency for Health Research Quality systematic review. Second, we performed a network meta-analysis to synthesize data from the clinical trials and estimate the comparative effectiveness of included treatments. Third, we implemented a V-BID by removing co-payments for the most effective treatments. Fourth, using a Monte Carlo simulation, we estimated the impact of the V-BID in terms of fracture reduction and cost-savings.

Results: Thirty-two randomized controlled trials were included in the network meta-analysis. We estimated that alendronate, risedronate, and teriparatide have the highest probability of being most effective across each fracture type-vertebral, hip, and nonvertebral/ nonhip. After eliminating co-payments, (ie, reducing them to zero), for these treatments, we estimated the health plan would experience a 7% (n = 287) decrease in fractures and an 8% ($6.8 million) decrease in costs.

Conclusions: Our study illustrates the benefits of comparative effectiveness evidence in V-BID development. We show that where clinical trials are lacking, network meta-analysis can provide valuable insights into the potential clinical and economic benefits of V-BID.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

MeSH terms