A comparison of pharmaceutical reimbursement agencies' processes and methods in France and Scotland

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 28, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 187-194

  Bending, Matthew ^a   Hutton, John ^a   McGrath, Clare ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b PFIZER GLOBAL RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Economic evaluation; government policy; Haute Autorit de sant ; JEL I18; Medicines; public health; regulation; Reimbursement; Scottish Medicines Consortium

Indexed keywords

ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; JEL I18; REGULATION; REIMBURSEMENT; SCOTTISH MEDICINES CONSORTIUM;

DATA PROCESSING; HEALTH; MEDICINE; PUBLIC HEALTH; PUBLIC POLICY; QUALITY CONTROL;

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; DRUG INDUSTRY; FRANCE; HEALTH ECONOMICS; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; QUALITY OF LIFE; REIMBURSEMENT; UNITED KINGDOM;

DECISION MAKING; FRANCE; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; INSURANCE, PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES; MODELS, ECONOMIC; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; PRESCRIPTION DRUGS; PUBLIC HEALTH; SCOTLAND;

EID: 84860733798     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462312000104     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Barbieri M, Hawkins N, Sculpher M. Who does the numbers? The role of third-party technology assessment to inform health systems' decision-making about the funding of health technologies. Value Health. 2009;12:193-201.
2. Cairns J. Providing guidance to the NHS: The ScottishMedicines Consortium and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence compared. Health Policy. 2006;76:134-143. (Pubitemid 43330597)
3. Claxton K, Sculpher M, Carroll S. Value-based pricing for pharmaceuticals: Its role, specification and prospects in a newly devolved NHS. York: Centre for Health Economcis, University of York; 2011.
4. Clement FM, Harris A, Li JJ, et al. Using effectiveness and costeffectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: A comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada. JAMA. 2009;302:1437-1443.
5. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: A consultation. London: Department of Health; 2010.
6. Department of Health. The pharmaceutical price regulation scheme. London: Crown; 2008.
7. HAS. Haute Autorité de santé. (HAS) 2011 [12/04/2011]. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c-5267/actes-medicamentsdispositifs- medicaux?cid=c-5267.
8. HAS. L'évaluation économique a la HAS Principes et méthodes 2010 [12/04/2011]. http://www.has-sante.fr/portail/jcms/c- 1003762/ levaluation-economique-a-la-has-principes-et-methodes.
9. Hutton J, McGrath C, Frybourg J-M, et al. Framework for describing and classifying decision-making systems using technology assessment to determine the reimbursement of health technologies (fourth hurdle systems). Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:10-18. (Pubitemid 43376234)
10. Lexchin J, Mintzes B. Medicine reimbursement recommendations in Canada, Australia, and Scotland. Am J Managed Care. 2008;14:581-588.
11. Ministry of Health. Framework Agreement on 25 September 2008 between the Comité Economique des Produits de Santé and the Pharmaceutical companies (as amended by the riders of 26 October 2009 and 7 October 2010). 2010 [01/06/2011].
12. NICE. Guide to methods of technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2008.
13. NICE. Response to the Department of Health consultation: Value based pricing. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; 2011.
14. Nielsen C, Funch T, Kristensen F. Health technology assessment: Research trends and future priorities in Europe. J Health Services Res Policy. 2011;16(Suppl 2):6-15.
15. OECD. Pharmaceutical pricing policies in a global market. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); 2008.
16. Office of Fair Trading. The pharmaceutical price regulation scheme: An OFT market study. London: OFT; 2007.
17. Office of Health Economics. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: A consultation. London: Office for Health Economics; 2011.
18. Raftery J. Review of NICE's recommendations,1999-2005. BMJ. 2006;332:1266-1268.
19. Raftery JP. Paying for costly pharmaceuticals: Regulation of new drugs in Australia, England and New Zealand. Med J Aust. 2008;188:26-28.
20. SMC. Guidance to manufacturers for completion of new product assessment form (NPAF) [Revised February 2011] 2011.
21. SMC. Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC). 2011 [12/04/2011]. http://www.scottishmedicines.org.uk/Home.