Multifaceted national and regional drug reforms and initiatives in ambulatory care in Sweden: Global relevance

Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 65-83

  Godman, Brian ^a,b   Wettermark, Björn ^c,d   Hoffmann, Mikael ^e   Andersson, Karolina ^f   Haycox, Alan ^b   Gustafsson, Lars L ^c,d  

^a MARIO NEGRI INSTITUTE FOR PHARMACOLOGICAL RESEARCH   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LIVERPOOL MANAGEMENT SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^c STOCKHOLM COUNTY COUNCIL   (Sweden)

^d KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^e LINKÖPING UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^f NORDIC SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Drug and Therapeutic Committee; Financial incentive; Generic; Healthcare reform; Pharmaceuticals; Pharmacoeconomics; Rational prescribing; Reference price

Indexed keywords

DIPEPTIDYL CARBOXYPEPTIDASE INHIBITOR; ESOMEPRAZOLE; PROTON PUMP INHIBITOR; ROSUVASTATIN; SIMVASTATIN; TUMOR NECROSIS FACTOR INHIBITOR; DRUG; GENERIC DRUG;

AMBULATORY CARE; COST CONTROL; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DRUG COST; DRUG UTILIZATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PRESCRIPTION; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; REVIEW; SWEDEN; BUDGET; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG LEGISLATION; ECONOMICS; EDUCATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; LEGAL ASPECT; PATIENT EDUCATION; PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTICS COMMITTEE; REIMBURSEMENT; STANDARD;

AMBULATORY CARE; BUDGETS; COST CONTROL; DRUG COSTS; DRUG INDUSTRY; DRUG PRESCRIPTIONS; DRUGS, GENERIC; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HEALTH EXPENDITURES; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; LEGISLATION, DRUG; PATIENT EDUCATION AS TOPIC; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; PHARMACY AND THERAPEUTICS COMMITTEE; SWEDEN;

EID: 67651199598     PISSN: 14737167     EISSN: 17448379     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1586/14737167.9.1.65     Document Type: Review

References (70)

1. Bergström G, Karlberg I. Decentralized responsibility for costs of outpatient prescription pharmaceuticals in Sweden Assessment of models for decentralized financing of subsidies from a management perspective. Health Policy 81, 358-367 (2007).
2. Glenngård AH, Hjalte F, Svensson M, Anell A, Bankauskaite V. Health systems in transition. WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Copenhagen, Sweden (2005).
3. Anell A. Swedish healthcare under pressure. Health Econ. 14, S237-S254 (2005).
4. Garattini S, Bertele V, Godman B, Haycox A, Wettermark B, Gustafsson LL. Enhancing the rational use of new medicines across European healthcare systems - a position paper. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 64, 1137-1138 (2008).
5. Lee T, Emanuel E. Tier 4 drugs and the fraying of the social compact. N. Engl. J Med. 359, 333-335 (2008).
6. Barrett A, Roques T, Small M, Smith R. How much will herceptin really cost? BMJ 333, 1118-1120 (2006).
7. Askling J, Fored CM, Geborek P et al. Swedish registers to examine drug safety and clinical issues in RA. Ann. Rbeum. Dis. 65, 707-712 (2006).
8. Drews J. Drug discovery - a historical perspective. Science 287, 1960-1964 (2000).
9. Evans WA, Relling MV. Moving towards individualized medicine with pharmacogenomics. Nature 429, 464-468 (2004).
10. Choudhry NK, Stelfox HD, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA 287, 612-617 (2002).
11. Angel. Industry-sponsored clinical research. JAMA 300, 1069-1071 (2008).
12. Relman A. Industry support of medical education. JAMA 300, 1071-1073 (2008).
13. Moynihan R. Doctors' education: the invisible influence of drug company sponsorship. BMJ 336,416-417 (2008).
14. Lenzer J, Brownlee S. Is there an (unbiased), doctor in the house? BMJ 337, 206-208 (2008).
15. Gerdtham UG, Lundin D. Why did drug spending increase during the 1990s? A decomposition based on Swedish data. Pharmacoeconomics 22, 29-42 (2004).
16. Lundkvist J. Pricing and reimbursement of drugs in Sweden. Eur. J. Health Economics 3, 66-70 (2002).
17. Anell A, Persson U. Reimbursement and clinical guidelines for pharmaceuticals in Sweden: do health-economic evaluations support decision making? Eur. J. Health Economics 50, 274-279 (2005).
18. Anonymous. OECD Health data. OECD, CREDES Paris (2008).
19. Wettermark B, Godman B, Andersson K et al. Recent national and regional drug reforms in Sweden - implications for pharmaceutical companies in Europe. Pharmacoeconomics 26, 537-550 (2008).
20. Sturm H, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Aaserud M et al. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. 3. Art No.: CD006731 (2007).
21. Carlsson P. Prognosticering av Offentliga Utgifter for Läkemedelsförmänen. Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (1999).
22. Carlson P. Resolving Health Care's Difficult Choices. Survey of Priority Setting in Sweden and Analysis of Principles and Guidelines on Priorities in Health Care. National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care Report 2. ISSN 1650-8475 (2008).
23. Andersson A, Petzold M, Allebeck P, Carlsten A. Influence of mandatory generic substitution on pharmaceutical sales patterns: a national study over five years. BMC Health Serv. Res. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-50 (Epub) (2008).
24. Andersson K, Sonesson C, Petzold M et al. What are the obstacles to generic substitution? An assessment of the behaviour of prescribers, patients and pharmacies during the first year of generic substitution in Sweden. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 14, 341-348 (2005).
25. Andersson K, Jorgensen T, Carlsten A. Physicians' opinions and experiences of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Reform. Scand. J. Public Health 34, 654-659 (2006).
26. Socialstyrelsen. [Patientsäkerhet vid utbyte av ls̈kemedel på apotek]. Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Patient safety and generic substitution. Stockholm, Sweden, Artikelnr: 2004-103-14 (2004).
27. Jonsson M, Amnefelt M, Frisk P. Customers' Opinions on Generic Substitution - a Swedish Pharmacy Survey. Poster presented at FIP meeting, Basel, Switzerland (2008).
28. Astrand B, Hovstadius B, Antonov K, Petersson G. The Swedish national pharmacy register. Stud. Health Technol. Inform. 129, 345-349 (2007).
29. Public Communication Campaigns (3rd Edition). Rice RE, Atkin CK (Eds). SAGE Publications Inc., London, UK (2001).
30. Sjöqvist F, Bergman U, Dahl ML et al. Drug and Therapeutics Committees: a Swedish Experience. WHO Drug Information 16, 207-213 (2002)
31. Andersson K. Swedish Pharmaceutical Benefit Reforms - Analyses of Implementation, Pharmaceutical Sales Patterns and Expenditures. ISBN: 91-628-6875-6 (2006).
32. Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patient's care. Lancet 362, 1225-1230 (2003).
33. Schiotz M, Merkur S. Health quality information in Sweden. Euro Observer 9, 5-7 (2007).
34. Jansson S, Anell A. The impact of decentralised drug-budgets in Sweden - a survey of physicians' attitudes towards costs and cost-effectiveness. Health Policy 76, 299-311 (2006).
35. Grantund D, Rudholm N, Wikstrom M. Fixed budgets as a cost containment measure for pharmaceuticals. Eur. J. Health Economics 7, 37-45 (2006).
36. Wettermark B, Nyman K, Bergman U. Five years' experience of quality assurance and feedback with individual prescribing profiles at a primary healthcare centre in Stockholm, Sweden. Qual. Prim. Care 12, 225-234 (2004).
37. Eliasson M, Bastholm P, Forsberg P et al. Janus computerised prescribing system provides pharmacological knowledge at point of care - design, development and proof of concept. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 62, 251-258 (2006).
38. Wettermark B, Tomson G, Bergman U. Kvalitetsindikatorer för läkemedel - läget i Sverige idag. [Quality indicators for drug prescribing - the situation in Sweden] Läkartidningen 103, 3607-3611 (2006).
39. Wettermark B. Drug Utilization 90% - Using Aggregate Drug Statistics for the Quality Assessment ofPrescribing. ISBN: 91-7140-048-6 (2004).
40. Wettermark B, Pehrsson A, Jinnerot D, Bergman U. Drug utilisation 90% profiles - a useful tool for quality assessment of prescribing in primary health care in Stockholm. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 12, 499-510 (2003).
41. Almkvist H, Bergman U, Edlert M et al. Kvalitetsbokslut minskade läkemedelskostnaderna i primärvärden - Stockholms läns landstings modell för decentraliserat kostnadsansvar i primärvården. [Quality review decreased costs for drugs in primary health care - the model in Stockholm County for decentralized responsibility for drug costs] Läkartidningen 105, 2930-2934 (2008).
42. Wettermark B, Hammar N, Fored M et al. The new Swedish Prescribed Drug Register - Opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological research and experience from the first six months. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 16, 726-735 (2007).
43. Wettermark B, Persson A, von Euler M. Secondary prevention in a large stroke population - a study of patients' purchase of recommended drugs. Stroke 39, 2880-2885 (2008).
44. Data on file. Specialist and non-specialist pharmaceutical sales in Stockholm 1997 to 2007. Stockholm County Council.
45. Gustafsson LL, Almkvist H, Hjemdahl P et al. Modell för strukturerad introduktion av nya. läkemedel: syftet är att erbjuda alla patienter ändamilsenlig behandling. [Model for structured introduction of new drugs: the aim is to offer all patients adequate treatment] Läkartidningen 105, 2917-2922 (2008).
46. Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th Edition. Free Press, NY, USA (1995).
47. IRIS - Introduction of Rimonabant in Stockholm. Project Plan 2007-2004-2003. Stockholm County Council. Stockholm, Sweden (2007).
48. Wettermark B, Raaschou P, Forslund T, Hjemdahl P. Fortsatta frågetecken kring bantningsmedlet Acomplia. [Still questions around the slimming agent rimobant. No approval in USA due to the risk of mental adverse effects] Läkartidningen 104, 3879-3881 (2007).
49. Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM et al. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ 317, 465-468 (1998).
50. Chapman S, Durieux P, Walley T. Good Prescribing Practice in Regulating Pharmaceuticals in Europe: Striving for Efficiency, Equity and Quality. Mossialos E, Mrazek M, Walley T (Eds). Open University Press (2004).
51. Barton S. Using clinical evidence. BMJ 322, 503-504 (2001).
52. Larsson DG, de Petro C, Paxeus N. Effluent from drug manufactures contains extremely high levels of pharmaceuticals. J. Hazard Mater. 148(3), 751-755 (2007).
53. Wennmalm Å, Gunnarsson B. Public Health care management of water pollution with pharmaceuticals: environmental classification and analysis of pharmaceutical residues in sewage water. Drug Inf. J. 39, 291-297 (2005).
54. Castensson S, Eriksson V, Lindborg K, Wettermark B. A method to include the environmental hazard in drug prescribing. Pharm. World Sci. 31, 24-31 (2009).
55. Simoens S. International comparison of generic medicine prices. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 23, 2647-2654 (2007).
56. Jack A. Balancing Big Pharma's books. BMJ 336, 418-419 (2008).
57. Godman B, Haycox A, Schwabe U et al. Having your cake and eating it: Office of Fair Trading proposal for funding new drugs to benefit patients and innovative companies. Pharmacoeconomics 26, 91-98 (2008).
58. Van Ganse E, Vukusic S, Zanetti L et al. TYSEDMUS: Cohort of multiple sclerosis patients treated with TYSARBI using the French European database for multiple sclerosis (EDMUS) - methodological aspects. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf. 17, S1-S294 (2008).
59. Frisk P, Mellgren T-O, Hedberg N et al. Utilisation of angiotensin receptor blockers in Sweden: combining survey and register data to study adherence to prescribing guidelines. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 64, 1223-1229 (2008).
60. Rothman D, Chimonas S. New developments in managing Physician-industry relationships. JAMA 300, 1067-1069 (2008).
61. Von Ferber L, Bausch J, Köster I et al. Pharmacotherapeutic Circles - Results of an 18-month peer-review prescribing-improvement programme for general practioners. Pharmacoeconomics 16, 273-283 (1999).
62. Schneider A, Wensing M, Biessecker et al. Impact of quality circles for improvement of asthma care: results of a randomised controlled trial. J. Eval. Clin. Pract. 14, 185-190 (2007).
63. Walley T, Mrazwek M, Mossialos E. Regulating pharmaceutical markets: Improving efficiency and controlling costs in the UK. Int. J.Health Plann. Manage. 20, 375-398(2005).
64. Harris C, Scrivener G. Fundholders' prescribing costs: the first five years. BMJ 313, 1531-1534 (1996).
65. Mason AR, Drummond MF, Hunter JA et al. Prescribing incentive schemes: a useful approach? Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy 4, 111-117 (2005).
66. Martens J, Verkhiven M, Severens J, Winkens R. Effects of a behaviour independent financial incentive on prescribing behaviour of general practioners. J. Eval. Clinical Practice 13, 369-373 (2007).
67. Godman B, Bucsics A, Burkhardt T et al. Insight into recent reforms and initiatives in Austria; implications for key stakeholders. Expert Rev. Pharmacoeconomcis Outcomes Res. 8, 357-371 (2008).
68. Grandfils N and Sermet C. Pharmaceutical policy in France: a mosaic of reforms. Eurohealth 12, 15-17 (2006).
69. Sandier S, Paris V, Polton D. Health Care Systems in Transition. France. Copenhagen. WHO Regional office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. WHO (2004).
70. Garattini S, Bertelè V. How can we regulate medicines better? BMJ 335, 803-805 (2007).