Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations: Updates in the Third Version.
Bae, Eun-Young; Hong, Jihyung; Bae, SeungJin; Hahn, Seokyung; An, Hyonggin; Hwang, Eun-Joo; Lee, Seung-Min; Lee, Tae-Jin.
Affiliation
  • Bae EY; College of Pharmacy, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju-si, Gyeongnam, South Korea.
  • Hong J; Department of Healthcare Management, College of Social Science, Gachon University, Seongnam-si, Gyeonggi-do, South Korea.
  • Bae S; College of Pharmacy, Ewha Womans University, Seoul, South Korea.
  • Hahn S; College of Medicine, Seoul National University, Seoul, South Korea.
  • An H; College of Medicine, Korea University, Seoul, South Korea.
  • Hwang EJ; Pharmaceutical Benefit Listing Division, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju-si, Gangwon-do, South Korea.
  • Lee SM; Pharmaceutical Benefit Listing Division, Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service, Wonju-si, Gangwon-do, South Korea.
  • Lee TJ; Department of Public Health Science, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul, 08826, South Korea. tjlee@snu.ac.kr.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy ; 20(4): 467-477, 2022 07.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35275388
ABSTRACT
The first version of the pharmacoeconomic (PE) guidelines was published in South Korea in 2006. Despite its first revision in 2011, there were still ambiguities in its interpretation. Moreover, methodologies for estimating effectiveness and costs have also evolved since then. Under these circumstances, the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service published the third version in January 2021. This article reviews the revision process and major changes made in the new edition of the PE guidelines. The revision was processed through reviews of the previous 50 PE submissions, international guidelines, academic literature, and surveys and advisory meetings to obtain stakeholders' opinions. The analysis perspective has changed from a limited societal perspective to a healthcare system perspective. In addition to the drug with the highest market share, drugs used in clinical trials can be selected as comparators under certain conditions. The discount rate decreased from 5% to 4.5%. Furthermore, the revised guidelines provide more detailed and specific instructions for items including non-inferiority margin, extrapolation, utility elicitation, and uncertainty. Treatment switch and co-dependent technology guidelines are newly included; the budget impact analysis guideline is deleted. Through this revision, transparency and consistency of decision-making is expected to improve.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Budgets / Economics, Pharmaceutical Type of study: Guideline / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Journal subject: SAUDE PUBLICA / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Corea del Sur

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Budgets / Economics, Pharmaceutical Type of study: Guideline / Health_economic_evaluation / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Appl Health Econ Health Policy Journal subject: SAUDE PUBLICA / SERVICOS DE SAUDE Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Corea del Sur