Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Value Health ; 23(4): 425-433, 2020 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32327159

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Mounting pressures on the healthcare system, such as budget constraints and new, costly health technologies reaching the market, have pushed payers and manufacturers to engage in managed entry agreements (MEAs) to address uncertainty and facilitate market access. OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to illustrate the current landscape of MEAs in Europe and to analyze the main hurdles they face in implementation, providing a policy perspective. METHODS: We conducted a health policy analysis based on a literature review and described the emergence, classification, current use, and implementation obstacles of MEAs in Europe. RESULTS: Throughout Europe, uncertainty and high prices of health technologies have pushed stakeholders towards MEAs. Two main types of MEAs were applied heavily, finance-based agreements (FBAs) and performance-based agreements, including individual performance-based agreements and coverage with evidence development (CED). Service-based agreements have not been as heavily considered so far, yet are increasingly used. Many European countries are turning to CEDs to address uncertainty and facilitate market access while negotiating the pricing and reimbursement rates of products. Despite the interest in CEDs, European countries have moved toward FBAs due to the complexities and burdens associated with PBAs. CONCLUSIONS: Ultimately, in Europe, with the exception of Italy, where MEAs have proven to be inefficient, MEAs are predominantly FBAs dedicated to addressing cost containment from payers' perspective and external reference pricing from the manufacturers' perspective. It has been speculated that MEAs will disappear in the medium-term as they are counterproductive for extending patient access and emergence of innovation. To inform value-based decision making and allow early access to innovative medicines, CEDs should be revisited.


Assuntos
Tecnologia Biomédica/economia , Atenção à Saúde/economia , Política de Saúde , Controle de Custos , Indústria Farmacêutica/economia , Europa (Continente) , Humanos , Formulação de Políticas , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica/economia
2.
J Mark Access Health Policy ; 5(1): 1381544, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29081924

RESUMO

In Poland, two proposed amendments to the reimbursement act are currently in preparation; these are likely to substantially change the pricing and reimbursement landscape for both drugs and medical devices. Proposed changes include: alignment of medical device reimbursement with that of pharmaceuticals; relaxing the strict reimbursement criteria for ultra-orphan drugs; establishment of an additional funding category for vaccines; introduction of compassionate use, and a simplified reimbursement pathway for well-established off-label indications; appreciation of manufacturers' innovation and research and development efforts by creating a dedicated innovation budget; introduction of a mechanism preventing excessive parallel import; prolonged duration of reimbursement decisions and reimbursement lists; and increased flexibility in defining drug programmes. Both amendments are still at a draft stage and many aspects of the new regulations remain unclear. Nonetheless, the overall direction of some of the changes is already evident and warrants discussion due to their high expected impact on pharmaceutical and device manufacturers. Here we evaluate the main changes proposed to the reimbursement of drugs, vaccines, and medical devices, and examine the impact they are likely to have on market access and pharmaceutical industry in Poland.

3.
J Mark Access Health Policy ; 5(1): 1307315, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28740617

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to provide an overview of biosimilar policies in 10 EU MSs. Methods: Ten EU MS pharmaceutical markets (Belgium, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, Poland, Spain, Sweden, and the UK) were selected. A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify supply-side and demand-side policies in place in the selected countries. Results: Supply-side policies for biosimilars commonly include price linkage, price re-evaluation, and tendering; the use of internal or external reference pricing varies between countries; health technology assessment is conducted in six countries. Regarding demand-side policies, pharmaceutical prescription budgets or quotas and monitoring of prescriptions (with potential financial incentives or penalties) are in place in eight and in seven countries respectively. Switching is generally allowed, but is solely the physician's responsibility. Automatic substitution is not recommended, or even forbidden, in most EU MSs. Prescription conditions or guidelines that apply to biosimilars are established in nearly all surveyed EU MSs. Conclusions: Important heterogeneity in policies on biosimilars was seen between (and even within) selected countries, which may partly explain variations in biosimilar uptake. Supply-side policies targeting price have been reported to limit biosimilar penetration in the long term, despite short-term savings, while demand-side policies are considered to positively impact uptake.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA