CHBRP is administered by UC at the systemwide Office of the President, and uses a small analytic staff to administer the program, support the faculty's analytic work, and liaison with the state legislature, agencies, and Governor's office.
The CHBRP analytic process is designed to respond to criteria defined in AB 1996 (See Table 1).
In describing our approach to a CHBRP medical effectiveness review, this paper addresses three types of challenges/issues: (1) the types of evidence that should be examined, and in particular, the tension between efficacy versus effectiveness; (2) issues arising from the fact that some mandates focus on expanding coverage for an intervention without an immediate effect; and (3) issues arising from attempting to be responsive to legislative needs.
EFFECTIVENESS VERSUS EFFICACY IN A CHBRP MANDATE REVIEW
For each mandate, CHBRP must report on the following information at baseline (i.
A sample of such documents is kept on file for a variety of plans and insurers are held on file by CHBRP.
The section of the CHBRP report on baseline health outcomes also presents data on health outcomes associated with the disease such as morbidity and mortality.
In addition, the CHBRP model adjusts for differences in member demographics, regional physician and hospital practice patterns, and managed care effects specific to the California health care system.
After CHBRP sent its report on AB 2185 to the legislature in April 2004, the bill was amended six times, twice in the State Assembly and four times in the State Senate.
Even though the final bill did not include mandated coverage for PASMTE, but only for the three medical devices, the original CHBRP estimated impacts of the bill are not expected to change significantly.
The CHBRP was established by the University of California in
and design of CHBRP illustrate how debates over health insurance