Similarities and differences between five European drug reimbursement systems

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 349-357

  Franken, Margreet ^a   Le Polain, Maïté ^b   Cleemput, Irina ^c   Koopmanschap, Marc ^a  

^a ERASMUS UNIVERSITY ROTTERDAM   (Netherlands)

^b BELGIAN HEALTH CARE KNOWLEDGE CENTRE KCE   (Belgium)

^c HASSELT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Country comparison; Decision making; Drug reimbursement; Health policy; Pharmaceutical economics

Indexed keywords

ADDED VALUES; AUSTRIA; BELGIUM; COUNTRY COMPARISONS; DECISION MAKING PROCESS; DRUG REIMBURSEMENT; HEALTH POLICY; NETHERLANDS; POLICY DOCUMENTS; QUALITY OF CARE; RISK-SHARING; SYSTEM IMPACT; VALUE FOR MONIES;

COST EFFECTIVENESS; DECISION MAKING; HIERARCHICAL SYSTEMS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; TRANSPARENCY;

EMBEDDED SYSTEMS;

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DRUG COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; INTERVIEW; REIMBURSEMENT;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EUROPE; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; INSURANCE, HEALTH, REIMBURSEMENT; INSURANCE, PHARMACEUTICAL SERVICES; INTERNATIONALITY; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUALITY OF HEALTH CARE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISMS;

EID: 84867506577     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462312000530     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Anell A. Priority setting for pharmaceuticals. The use of health economic evidence by reimbursement and clinical guidance committees. Eur J Health Econ. 2004;5:28-35.
2. Cohen J, Faden L, Predaris S, et al. Patient access to pharmaceuticals: An international comparison. Eur J Health Econ. 2007;8:253-266.
3. Cohen J, Stolk E, Niezen M. The increasingly complex fourth hurdle for pharmaceuticals. Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25:727-734.
4. Dreyer NA, Garner S. Registries for robust evidence. JAMA. 2009;302:790.
5. Drummond M, Jönsson B, Rutten F, et al. Reimbursement of pharmaceuticals: Reference pricing versus health technology assessment. Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12:263-271.
6. Garattini L, Cornago D, De Compadri P. Pricing and reimbursement of in-patent drugs in seven European countries: A comparative analysis. Health Policy. 2007;82:330-339.
7. Garrison LP Jr, Neumann PJ, Erickson P, et al. Using real world data for coverage and payment decisions: The ISPOR Real World Data Task Force Report. Value Health. 2007;10:326-335.
8. Grandfils N. Drug price setting and regulation in France. Paris: IRDES Institute for Research and Information in Health Economics; 2008. Report No.: Working Papers DT 16.
9. Harris A, Buxton M, O'Brien B, et al. Using economic evidence in reimbursement decisions for health technologies: Experience of 4 countries. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2001;1:7-12.
10. Hutton J, McGrath C, Frybourg JM, 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.
11. Klein R. Priorities and rationing: Pragmatism or principles? BMJ. 1995;311:761.
12. Kristensen FB, Lampe K, Chase DL, et al. Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: Structures, methodologies, and tools developed by the European network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25: 1-8.
13. Le Pen C, Priol G, Lilliu H. What criteria for pharmaceuticals reimbursement? Eur J Health Econ. 2003;4:30-36.
14. Levy AR, Mitton C, Johnston KM, et al. International comparison of comparative effectiveness research in five Jurisdictions: Insights for the US. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:813-830.
15. Van Ganse E, Chamba G, Bruet G, Becquart V, Stamm C, Lopes S, Marty Ch. PPRI Pharma Profile France 2008. Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Information; Commissioned by the European Commission, Directorate-General Health and Consumer Protection and Austrian Federal Ministry of Health, Family and Youth. WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies. Gesundheit Ö sterreich GmbH.
16. Niezen M, de Bont A, Stolk E, et al. Conditional reimbursement within the Dutch drug policy. Health Policy. 2007;84:39-50.
17. OECD Health Data 2010 [Online]. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. 2010. http://www.irdes.fr/EcoSante/DownLoad/ OECDHealthData-FrequentlyRequestedData.xls (accessed December 12, 2010).
18. Sermet C, Andrieu V, Godman B, et al. Ongoing pharmaceutical reforms in France: Implications for key stakeholder groups. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2010;8:7-24.
19. Sorenson C. The role of HTA in coverage and pricing decisions: A crosscountry comparison. Euro Observer. 2009;11:1-11.
20. Stevens A, Milne R. Health technology assessment in England and Wales. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:11-24.
21. Stolk EA, Poley MJ. Criteria for determining a basic health services package. Recent developments in The Netherlands. Eur J Health Econ. 2005;6:2-7.
22. TLV. Hypertension: A review of medicines for lowering blood pressure. Solna: The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency; 2008.
23. Vuorenkoski L, Toiviainen H, Hemminki E. Decision-making in priority setting for medicines-A review of empirical studies. Health Policy. 2008;86:1-9.
24. Vuorenkoski L, Toiviainen H, Hemminki E. Drug reimbursement in Finland-A case of explicit prioritizing in special categories. Health Policy. 2003;66:169-177.
25. Wirtz V, Cribb A, Barber N. Reimbursement decisions in health policy-Extending our understanding of the elements of decision-making. Health Policy. 2005;73:330-338.