Hospital Value Analysis: Build a Case Buyers Can Fund

To get a new medical device through hospital value analysis, build a case that connects the clinical problem to the economics of the people buying it. That is the practical lesson I take from my conversations with Brian Wagner, Darren Selsky, Tim Blair, and Todd Dunn. Their examples point to the work behind that case: understand the committee, show the evidence, identify who pays, and explain why this purchase deserves attention.

Who needs a reason to approve the device?

Brian Wagner, Founder and CEO, Health Insights Consulting Group, says the physician champion is only part of the hospital buying group. He names procurement, the CFO, operations, and the chief information officer as people who need convincing. In his account, those people have different pain points. A clinical conversation does not answer every question they bring to the purchase.

You've got to convince the chief information officer.

Brian Wagner

Brian also questions whether a single sales rep can cover every constituency and address its unmet needs. His alternative is to understand the buyer's journey, segment the audience, and develop more personalized content. He describes giving customers information they can use when they want it, including how training and installations will work.

I would use that advice to review the case before asking for committee consideration. Write down each stakeholder's question and the evidence that answers it. If the material only explains why a physician likes the device, use Brian's list to find the unanswered questions. For operations, his examples suggest explaining the practical work after purchase, including training and installation. Make that information easy to find.

What evidence makes the economic case useful?

Darren Selsky, Fractional leader, Medalytics Consulting Group, says having the right product needs to be accompanied by an economic story. He raises this while describing companies outside the US market that ask how to navigate hospital value analysis. Their questions are about messaging and what the committee needs to hear.

For Darren, the work includes both clinical outcomes and economic evidence. He discusses the expense of a post-market study or clinical trial as part of commercialization. His point is that preparing a product for market also involves preparing the evidence around its value.

My takeaway is to put the economic claim beside its support. What exactly are you asking the hospital to believe? Which evidence supports that statement? Where does the evidence stop? Darren's combination of clinical outcomes and economic evidence gives me a useful way to review a proposal: check that both parts are present and that the reader can understand how they connect.

I would also distinguish a supported result from an assumption in the proposed use. That is how I would apply his advice when assembling committee materials. The aim is a clear economic argument whose support the reader can inspect. A confident sentence by itself does not do that work.

Does the benefit reach the cost center paying?

Tim Blair, Founder and CEO, iCHOR Vascular, describes a specific weakness in some health economic stories. A technology may create savings elsewhere in the health system while the department buying it carries the cost. He questions the expectation that a cost center will pay for something whose benefit lands in another cost center.

Tim asks how the economics affect the person buying the technology. He is describing a problem with where the cost and benefit land, even when he can follow the overall health economic story. His example is a proposal that asks a hospital to take on a cost while pointing to savings elsewhere in the system.

Tim also says strong physician champions can struggle to support innovation through the process. His example makes the economic question more concrete for me. Physician enthusiasm and an understandable benefit still leave work to do if the purchasing department cannot see how the purchase affects its own economics.

Before presenting, I would trace the proposed cost and benefit to the departments involved. Name the cost center expected to pay. Explain where the claimed savings or other economic value appear. If those are different places, make that difference visible in the case. Tim's example is a reason to examine that gap before relying on an overall savings claim.

What other hospital priorities are you competing with?

Todd Dunn, Founder and CEO, The Innovator's Journey, recalls sitting in a hospital capital allocation meeting. The requests exceeded what the available money could cover. He uses that experience to challenge the way early-stage companies think about competition. The purchase is competing for the system's time and money, including money that could go toward ambulances or hiring nurses.

Todd says the value needs to be clear enough to compete with those other requests. He connects that work to understanding the clinical problem, the business problem, and what makes the purchase feel safe. His advice is to document how the system thinks.

That changes the question I would bring to a proposal review. Can we explain why this problem merits attention alongside the hospital's other priorities? A comparison with another device company does not answer the budget question in Todd's story. I would ask the team to explain the purchase in the hospital's own terms and check whether the people buying and using the device agree with the problem being described.

What to do next before committee review?

Start with Todd's practical advice: learn how decisions are made, which committees are involved, and what criteria they use. He explicitly names value analysis, clinical governance, clinical appropriateness, and IT governance. I would turn that discovery into a preparation list for the actual hospital under discussion.

• Map the decision. Identify the committees and stakeholders, then write down their questions. Use Brian's examples to check whether procurement, finance, operations, and IT have been considered.
• Match the claim to the evidence. Review the clinical and economic support together, following Darren's emphasis. Mark assumptions that still need work.
• Follow the money. Use Tim's cost-center question and Todd's allocation example to explain who pays, who benefits, and how the proposal addresses competing priorities.

Those are the steps I would take back to the team before requesting the next review. Use the conversations to strengthen the case the hospital has to evaluate.