BiO Collaboration: MedTAP
By Cheryl Coupé, Scribo

Collaboration is a key element in how the Oregon Bioscience Association promotes the growth and quality of our industry. In this issue, we talk to Oregon Bio’s lobbyist, Jack Isselmann of Tonkon Torp, about collaboration with member organizations on effecting new MedTap policies for the review and recommendation of medical devices and technology. 

Oregon Bio: Briefly, what is MedTAP and what does it mean to Oregon Bio members?

Isselmann: MedTAP is the medical technology assessment program for all public purchasers of health care in Oregon (e.g., state and local governments, transit districts, fire, police, school districts, etc.). In total, it reviews health technologies on behalf of purchasers who procure health care and health care benefits for over 800,000 people in Oregon. It is housed in the new Oregon Health Authority created in 2009 by House Bill 2009. The program addresses the introduction, diffusion, and utilization of medical technologies and their associated services. Oregon Bio members – whether device manufacturers or drug developers – are impacted by MedTAP as they develop new technologies and bring these to market.

Oregon Bio: What is the potential impact of the new policy recommendations?

Isselmann: MedTAP today suffers from a lack of structure in terms of technologies that are reviewed and the process for reviewing them. The changes we are seeking, either administratively or if necessary, legislatively, will introduce comprehensive program policies and procedures, updated at least yearly, for the administration of the program. There will also be a formal appeals process introduced for review of MedTAP decisions which does not exist today. The Health Resources Commission would take on greater oversight of MedTAP functions and the process would be more evidenced-based as result of these policy decisions.

Oregon Bio: How are Oregon Bio members working together to effect these changes?

Isselmann: Oregon Bio is collaborating with several organizations and companies to elevate this need for policy change. Participants include:

• AdvaMed
• Allergan
• Biotechnology Industry Organization (BIO)
• Genentech
• Johnson & Johnson
• Medtronic
• Oregon Bioscience Association
• Oregon Freeze Dry
• Oregon Translational Research and Drug Development (OTRADI)
• PhRMA
• RS Medical
• Yecuris Corp.

Oregon Bio: As Oregon Bio’s lobbyist, what are your thoughts on the importance of this kind of collaboration to influence policy decisions that can affect the future of our industry?

Isselmann: Oregon Bio, as a small and emerging business association, needs to rely on collaborations to help advance significant policy reforms, like the changes to MedTAP. This kind of collaboration is one we plan to emulate in a number of policy areas in 2011 and beyond.

Oregon Bio: Are there other similar opportunities on the horizon?

Isselmann: In economic development and job creation, Oregon Bio as a representative of a significant economic cluster—life sciences—has an important voice in the types of investments in education, workforce, and job creation that Oregon will make over the next decade. We look forward to working with the state's major business associations—Oregon Business Council, Associated Oregon Industries, Portland Business Alliance, and Oregon Business Association—as well as with key industry players like PHRMA and others in collaboration as Oregon attempts to realign its investments in a time of economic recovery.

Cheryl Coupé is a freelance technology writer, editor for EE Catalog (www.eecatalog.com), and the editor-in-chief of the BiO quarterly newsletter. Find more information at www.scribo.net or contact her at cheryl@scribo.net.