procurement

I wonder, have you ever had a conversation with your doctor or nurse about barcodes? Not likely, I guess! Whilst the humble barcode is so ingrained in everyday life (after all, we all scan barcodes at the checkout), its potential in healthcare is both enormous, but unfortunately largely unknown. The reality is that for patients and caregivers, the beep of a scanned barcode has the possibility to help ensure that a patient receives the right medical product at the right time and that caregivers have the benefit of additional surety in their processes. Scanning barcodes can help to minimise errors due to incorrect identification of product or patient and ensure the correct product is in the hospital when the patient needs it. The global, voluntary user community, GS1 Healthcare - which brings together all healthcare supply chain stakeholders, including manufacturers, distributors, healthcare providers, solution providers, regulatory bodies and industry associations - recently produced a video to illustrate the value global standard barcodes add in hospital processes. For every one of us, this is a must-watch - after all, at one point in our lives, we will all be patients. For staff of healthcare product supplier organisations this is even more important. After all, suppliers are applying GS1 barcodes to meet a range of regulatory and trading partner requirements. In turn, these barcodes should be used by all healthcare stakeholders, most importantly, the healthcare provider organisations and staff that are issuing these suppliers’ products to patients. Please take two minutes of your time, open your minds and remember that the use of global standard barcodes in healthcare empowers all of us - patients, healthcare provider staff and healthcare provider organisations. A simple scan can contribute to doctors and nurses being able to focus even more on caring for every one of...
As ‘thinking season’ kicks off, the focus is on how technology and big data can deliver better value healthcare to more people than ever before. January is a time for reflection, planning and predicting what lies ahead. It’s the season for assessing the mega-trends that will shape our future and working out how we will respond. Perhaps the most prestigious venue for future-gazing is Davos where world leaders from politics and business gather on 17-20 January for the World Economic Forum . Here, global influencers will look at how prevailing economic, social and political forces present challenges and opportunities for all of us. Last year, the key phrase from Davos was the ‘ 4 th Industrial Revolution’ . The WEF set the tone for thousands of conversations on the topic last year, including at the MedTech Forum in Brussels last December. This year – with the convergence of technologies that blur the lines between the physical, digital and biological systems still very much in view – the theme will be Responsive and Responsible Leadership . But what can healthcare leaders expect from 2017? When it comes to healthcare , the WEF frames the conversation with some key demographic statistics: - By 2050, the world’s population will have risen to 9.7 billion - 2 billion people will be over the age of 60 To continue to meet the (growing) demands of healthcare consumers without blowing up healthcare budgets, new ways of delivery services will be required. Smarter, more efficient, technologies and systems will be essential. This brings us to the concept at the heart of many new-year health policy forecasts: value . Value-based healthcare has been something of a buzzword since it was coined by Harvard’s Michael Porter . Most of us have an intuitive sense of value. In healthcare, Porter...
This blog is part 7 of a series on the MEAT value-based procurement project, an initiative that advocates towards a shift from price-based procurement towards value-based procurement. It does so by defining a Most Economically Advantageous Tendering (MEAT) framework that includes the value of medical technologies, services and solutions in procurement processes across Europe. Read part 1 , part 2 , part 3 , part 4 , part 5 and part 6 . Who looks after human health – surgeon or public procurement official? The answer should be: both. The concept of Value Based Procurement helps us to explore the link between purchasing decisions and health. Implementation of the new Public Procurement Directive spurred discussion in the healthcare sector on how to define the best value of purchasing goods and services. While we are moving away from price-only criteria and there is some more emphasis on the overall cost of care delivery, we are still far away from obtaining most economically advantageous outcomes. Besides additional direct cost impacts driven by energy-use, cost of spare parts or disposal, one needs to quantify and take into account the savings derived from reduced patient’s length of stay, rate of readmissions, etc. This however does not capture all cost the society bears. What is also explicitly addressed by the new Public Procurement Directive, but often overlooked in these debates, are the environmental and social aspects of delivering patient care. Meanwhile, Sustainability issues such as clean air and water, and fair working conditions are fundamental contributors to population’s health and are valued by our society. This approach should be not only reflected in the delivery of care but also in purchasing practices. Such vision of health positions sustainability as an important policy objective and challenges a narrow scope of healthcare focusing solely on management of...
During the past few years, several trends have emerged that are reshaping how health care is delivered. Health systems continue to consolidate. Risk sharing and price sensitivity are more commonplace than ever. Payors are no longer rewarding incremental innovation. The cumulative effect of these trends is a willingness by healthcare providers to use ‘good enough’ products with a reluctance to use products that provide only an incremental benefit. However, as much as things are changing, one thing remains critically important: health care systems are still looking at the healthcare industry to develop truly meaningful innovation that positively affects patient’s lives. Yes, reducing costs is critical, but delivering better outcomes and better patient experiences have risen to the top of demands from health systems globally. Our focus should be on transforming clinical care through meaningful, differentiated innovation. It is important to have healthy debates about the capabilities and opportunities that exist within different approaches to innovation, especially the differences between outcomes innovation, when a patient’s prognosis is improved and process innovation, where there is a change in procedure performance or cost, but no meaningful impact on the patient. This distinction is critical, because if we are to truly deliver transformational innovation that positively affects the lives of patients, we must have an unrelenting focus on outcomes not process. To redefine innovation we need to focus on disease states and the entire continuum of care. We need to source innovation wherever it is, within our company or externally. And, as we are innovating, we must consider product attributes that deliver the evidence and value for payors that ultimately leads to access for patients. Within Johnson & Johnson, we have adopted a broad-based approach to innovation to allow us to deliver the promise of products that are truly transformational. The key is to...
This blog is part 7 of a series on MEAT Value-Based Procurement, an initiative that advocates a shift from price-based procurement towards value-based procurement in healthcare. It does so by defining a Best Price Quality Ratio method within the Most Economically Advantageous Tendering (MEAT) framework put forward in the European Public Procurement directive. Read part 1 , part 2 , part 3 , part 4 and part 5 and part 6 . Our health systems need reforms to maintain universal health coverage and, given the economic and demographic pressures we face, Europe cannot afford its citizens to be in poor health. This will require new thinking about the economic value of health for individuals, families and society (health as an economic good) in addition to the economics (the cost-efficiency) of healthcare systems. Instead of focusing on the costs of healthcare, we must consider what is delivered. The full value of investing in health and quality healthcare can be realised by focussing on health outcomes complemented and enhanced by the economic value offered by being in good health and having cost-efficient health systems. This value-oriented approach can be implemented when purchasing health technologies. It is already seen in some modern procurement procedures resulting in the highest economic value in addition to best health outcomes. These most economically-advantageous tenders (MEAT) can deliver optimal value to society. To make informed decisions about what constitutes value, we need to consider the full value that health investments bring – not just the outcomes for patients or for hospitals, but the full impact these interventions can bring to society by keeping people in good health. Defining value The real economic consequences of being in a state of ill-health are not solely related to the direct costs of health and care, but include wider socio-economic consequences and...
This blog is part 6 of a series on the MEAT value-based procurement project, an initiative that advocates towards a shift from price-based procurement towards value-based procurement. It does so by defining a Most Economically Advantageous Tendering (MEAT) framework that includes the value of medical technologies, services and solutions in procurement processes across Europe. Read part 1 , part 2 , part 3 , part 4 and part 5 . When the new EU Directive on public procurement was finalised in 2014, replacing the previous framework, it was hailed by the European Parliament as a tool for ensuring better quality of supplies and services and value for money. The European Parliament was also keen to emphasise how the Directive was designed to encourage innovation, improve SMEs’ access to public sector markets and to integrate environmental and social considerations into procurement policy. One of the tools within the Directive to achieve these aims was the requirement for contracting authorities to base the award of contracts on the most economically advantageous tender (MEAT). Contracting authorities were also permitted to use lifecycle costing in their award criteria in order to assess total costs. Previously, tenders could be awarded either on the basis of lowest price, or on MEAT criteria which typically included a balance of price and quality criteria. All of this seemed to be good news for those of us with an interest in value-based healthcare. Defining what MEAT really means However, whilst the terminology was promising, it was misleading. Indeed the Directive provided that MEAT could be based either on price only, cost only, or best price quality ratio. Although Member States have been given a choice when implementing the Directive into national law whether they wanted to exclude or restrict the use of price or cost only as the sole...