Humanitarian device exemption

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)已根据人道主义设备豁免(HDE)途径批准了针对肌张力障碍和强迫症(OCD)的深部脑刺激(DBS)。然而,来自功能神经外科医生社区的最新报告表明,尽管两种情况都得到了FDA的相似支持,但保险授权仍然是OCDDBS植入的不成比例的障碍.这项对健康保险政策的横断面研究量化了这两种干预措施的当前付款人格局。
    这项研究的目的是量化DBS在HDE状态下OCD的当前付款人政策覆盖范围,与美国保险市场中符合条件的患者的肌张力障碍的DBS相比。
    已查询商业健康保险政策数据库,以获取DBS关于肌张力障碍和强迫症的文档。在DBS上针对肌张力障碍或强迫症的付款人保单覆盖率声明对结果进行了单独分析,并将其分类为独特或非独特的保单。然后为该地理区域编码了独特的政策立场,是否提供保险,以及作为证据和理由引用的指南。
    从数据库中的80个策略,针对肌张力障碍或强迫症的DBS有34项独特的政策,涵盖了所有50个州。在34项独特的政策中,3(9%)涵盖强迫症的DBS,32(94%)覆盖肌张力障碍。只有两项政策涵盖了两项干预措施。
    尽管FDA的支持水平相似,DBS在国家层面上对OCD的支持较少。这项研究开始量化功能神经外科医生在最近的文献中指出的差异。
    The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted deep brain stimulation (DBS) approval under the humanitarian device exemption (HDE) pathway for both dystonia and obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). However, recent reports from the community of functional neurosurgeons suggest that insurance authorization remains a disproportionate barrier to OCD DBS implantation despite both conditions having similar support from the FDA. This cross-sectional study of health insurance policies quantifies the current payer landscape for these two interventions.
    The aim of this study was to quantify the current payer policy coverage of DBS under HDE status for OCD as compared to DBS for dystonia for eligible patients in the US insurance market.
    A commercial health insurance policy database was queried for documentation on DBS for dystonia and OCD. Results were individually analyzed for payer policy coverage statements on DBS for either dystonia or OCD and categorized as unique or nonunique policies. Unique policy positions were then coded for the geographic region, whether coverage was offered, and guidelines cited as evidence and justification.
    From the 80 policies in the database, there were 34 unique policies addressing DBS for either dystonia or OCD representing coverage of all 50 states. Of the 34 unique policies, 3 (9%) covered DBS for OCD, while 32 (94%) covered dystonia. Only 2 policies covered neither intervention.
    In spite of similar levels of support from the FDA, DBS for OCD has less support from insurance companies on a national level. This study begins to quantify the disparity noted by functional neurosurgeons in recent literature.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    食品和药物管理局(FDA)的设备和放射健康中心的使命是保护和促进公众健康。它确保患者和提供者能够及时和持续地获得安全,有效,以及高质量的医疗设备和安全的辐射产品,通过提供有关我们监管的产品和我们做出的决定的有意义和及时的信息。2021年9月17日,举行了FDA研讨会,向利益相关者提供信息,包括脊柱社区的成员,设备制造商,监管事务专业人员,临床医生,病人,和公众对FDA的规定,与脊柱器械临床回顾相关的指导和调节途径。它无意传达任何新政策,进程,或关于医疗器械营销授权的解释。这个研讨会由个人介绍组成,小组讨论,问答环节,和受众调查。信息共享包括与患者报告结果相关的讨论,临床医生报告的结果,观察员报告的结果,和绩效结果。涉及外部主题专家的讨论涵盖了与脊柱器械临床研究相关的主题,包括目标人群的定义,入学标准,纳入代表性不足的患者组的策略,不良事件和二次外科手术的报告,临床研究终点,和临床结果评估。会议记录和网络广播研讨会链接目前已发布在FDA网站上。讨论了重要的相关问题和挑战,并分享了一系列令人兴奋的新想法和概念,这些想法和概念有望推进监管科学,患者护理和与脊柱设备相关的未来创新。
    The mission of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)\'s Center for Devices and Radiological Health is to protect and promote public health. It assures that patients and providers have timely and continued access to safe, effective, and high-quality medical devices and safe radiation-emitting products by providing meaningful and timely information about the products we regulate and the decisions we make. On September 17, 2021, an FDA workshop was held to provide information to stakeholders, including members of the spine community, device manufacturers, regulatory affairs professionals, clinicians, patients, and the general public regarding FDA regulations, guidance and regulatory pathways related to spinal device clinical review. It was not intended to communicate any new policies, processes, or interpretations regarding medical device marketing authorizations. This workshop consisted of individual presentations, group discussions, question and answer sessions, and audience surveys. Information-sharing included discussions related to patient-reported outcomes, clinician-reported outcomes, observer-reported outcomes, and performance outcomes. Discussions involving external subject matter experts covered topics related to spinal device clinical studies including definition of a target population, enrollment criteria, strategies for inclusion of under-represented patient groups, reporting of adverse event and secondary surgical procedures, clinical study endpoints, and clinical outcome assessments. A meeting transcript and webcast workshop link are currently posted on the FDA website. Important related issues and challenges were discussed, and an exciting range of new ideas and concepts were shared which hold promise to advance regulatory science, patient care and future innovation related to spinal devices.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    As with new drugs, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration\'s approval process is intended to provide consumers with assurance that, once it reaches the market place, a medical device is safe and effective in its intended use. Bringing a device to market takes an average of 3 to 7 years, compared with an average of 12 years for drugs. However, there are concerns that Food and Drug Administration processes may not be sufficient to meet the assurances of safety and efficacy as intended. This second part of a 2-part series reviews the basic steps in development and Food and Drug Administration approval of medical devices, and summarizes post-marketing processes for drugs and devices.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号