Abstract
The aim of this was to evaluate how institutional barriers prevent the inclusion of broader individual and societal benefits associated with new health care innovations from being considered when assessing the value of medical treatments and making health care coverage determinations. A survey of health insurance providers, pharmacy benefit managers, employee benefit consultancies, and employer group representatives in the United States queried respondents' opinions regarding the feasibility of evaluating indirect treatment benefits in four domains: absenteeism, presenteeism, caregiver burden, and quality of life. Inclusion of indirect benefits (including absenteeism and presenteeism) in the assessment of a treatment's value was of low importance to payers, but higher importance to employer stakeholders. Therapies that improve physical or mental function accrue benefits both directly and indirectly and can only be adequately assessed if measurement standards for indirect benefits and quantifiable measures are established.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of occupational and environmental medicine
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
