According to my research, Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) is the trend in health care that keeps growing. EBM experts compare available clinical evidence for various treatments that may be used in a disease, determine the best standard care (based on the comparison), and apply the “best” standard to care for patients. Evidence-Based Medicine aims for helping health care providers decide which patient should get which treatment, and under what circumstances. After this, the final decision of which treatment is best for an individual is based on the doctor and patient.
The evidence that EBM looks at includes: how well the product/therapy works, how effective it is compared with alternative treatments, how safe it is, and how the therapy affects different people differently. It is also a way to keep patients and doctors informed about the potential risks and benefits of a treatment.
Another approach is the Health Technology Assessment (HTA). Unlike EBM, HTA tries to determine the cost-effectiveness of the treatment. It looks at how cost-effective the treatment is when used in a large diversified group of people who are covered by a healthy system. It does not address whether the treatment is cost-effective for an individual.
Some government-financed health care systems require cost-effectiveness assessments, in addition to regular approval (before a product is made to patients). The disadvantage for the patients is that some private payers use HTA to decide if they’ll reimburse the patient for treatments. If the payer decides a product isn’t cost-effective for the “average person”, the patient would have to pay for it themselves. (JNJ)
In my opinion, Johnson and Johnson has adapted to the growth in technology, especially as effectively as it’s competitor, Pzifer, the world’s “largest’ research-based
