<code id='F716634E24'></code><style id='F716634E24'></style>
    • <acronym id='F716634E24'></acronym>
      <center id='F716634E24'><center id='F716634E24'><tfoot id='F716634E24'></tfoot></center><abbr id='F716634E24'><dir id='F716634E24'><tfoot id='F716634E24'></tfoot><noframes id='F716634E24'>

    • <optgroup id='F716634E24'><strike id='F716634E24'><sup id='F716634E24'></sup></strike><code id='F716634E24'></code></optgroup>
        1. <b id='F716634E24'><label id='F716634E24'><select id='F716634E24'><dt id='F716634E24'><span id='F716634E24'></span></dt></select></label></b><u id='F716634E24'></u>
          <i id='F716634E24'><strike id='F716634E24'><tt id='F716634E24'><pre id='F716634E24'></pre></tt></strike></i>

          leisure time

          leisure time

          author:focus    Page View:67695
          A phone screen shows a logo of Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services – health tech coverage from STAT
          Adobe

          The medical device industry is split on whether a proposed new Medicare reimbursement pathway will do anything to soothe their insurance coverage woes.

          Device makers have long complained that the unclear, rocky road to payment kills innovative companies. So they were thrilled when the Trump administration proposed a rule that would have guaranteed four years of Medicare coverage of approved devices deemed “breakthroughs” by the Food and Drug Administration. They hoped private payers would follow suit. But in 2021, under a new administration and a push for more device scrutiny, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid pulled back on the idea, promising a replacement that would streamline coverage for innovative devices while ensuring safe, high-quality care.

          advertisement

          The pathway put forth last week, called Transitional Coverage for Emerging Technologies (TCET), is only a notice, not yet a rule that would grant CMS new powers. The program applies solely to devices that have earned a place in the FDA’s breakthrough device program, which was established to identify devices that the agency believed could provide “more effective” treatment or diagnosis of serious conditions than the current standard of care. But because those devices can be brought to market with less certainty in their benefits and risks than other products, experts said, the idea of automatic reimbursement was dicey.

          Unlock this article by subscribing to STAT+ and enjoy your first 30 days free!

          GET STARTED Log In

          Wikipedia

          Medical leaders decry Supreme Court decision on affirmative action
          Medical leaders decry Supreme Court decision on affirmative action

          STEFANIREYNOLDS/AFPviaGettyImagesMedicalleadersonThursdayreactedswiftlytotheSupremeCourt’sdecisionto

          read more
          Kenai launches with $82 million for Parkinson’s stem cell therapy
          Kenai launches with $82 million for Parkinson’s stem cell therapy

          AdobeThedreamofbeingabletopluckacelltherapyoffofafreezershelfandspeedilygiveittocancerpatientsismate

          read more
          Guidelines to prevent youth baseball injuries need more muscle
          Guidelines to prevent youth baseball injuries need more muscle

          Apitcheratthe2018LittleLeagueWorldSeries.RobCarr/GettyImages“Weallknowthatweareinthemiddleofanepidem

          read more

          International team creates first chimeric human

          Imageofoneofthechimerichuman-monkeyembryos.SalkInstituteforBiologicalStudiesAteamofscientistsfromthe