Operationalizing value-based pricing of medicines: A taxonomy of approaches

PharmacoEconomics

Volumn 31, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 1-10

  Sussex, Jon ^a   Towse, Adrian ^a   Devlin, Nancy ^a  

^a OFFICE OF HEALTH ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DRUG CONTROL; DRUG COST; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG VALUE BASED PRICING; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; TAXONOMY; UNITED KINGDOM;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DRUG INDUSTRY; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; PHARMACEUTICAL PREPARATIONS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS;

EID: 84871438908     PISSN: 11707690     EISSN: 11792027     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40273-012-0001-x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Department of Health. Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS. London: Department of Health; 2010.
2. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: a consultation. London: Department of Health; 2010.
3. Hughes DA. Value-based pricing: incentive for innovation or zero net benefit? Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29(9):731-5.
4. Towse A. If it ain't broke, don't price fix it: the OFT and the PPRS. Health Econ. 2007;16(7):653-65.
5. Claxton K, Briggs A, Buxton MJ, Culyer AJ, McCabe C, Walker S, et al. Value based pricing for NHS drugs: an opportunity not to be missed? BMJ. 2008;336:251.
6. Office of Fair Trading. The Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme: an OFT market study. London: Office of Fair Trading; 2007.
7. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines: Government response to consultation. London: Department of Health; 2011.
8. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London: NICE; 2008.
9. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Appraising life-extending, end of life treatments. London: NICE; 2009.
10. Rawlins M, Barnett D, Stevens A. Pharmacoeconomics: NICE's approach to decision-making. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;70(3):346-9.
11. Devlin N, Sussex J. Incorporating multiple criteria in HTA: methods and processes. London: Office of Health Economics; 2011.
12. Golan O, Hansen P, Kaplan G, Tal O. Health technology prioritization: which criteria for prioritizing new technologies, and what are their relative weights? Health Policy. 2011;102(2-3):126-35.
13. Orr S, Woolf J, Morris S. What values should count in HTA for new medicines under value based pricing in the UK? In: Paper presented at the Health Economists' Study Group Conference, Bangor University, Bangor; 2011.
14. Devlin N, Parkin D. Funding fertility: issues in the allocation and distribution of resources to assisted reproductive technologies. Human Fertility. 2003;6:S2-6.
15. Shah K, Praet C, Devlin N, et al. Is the aim of the health care system to maximise QALYs? An investigation of 'what else matters' in the NHS. OHE Research Paper No. 11/03. London: Office of Health Economics; 2011.
16. Brazier J, Ratcliffe J, Salomon JA, Tsuchiya A. Measuring and valuing health benefits for economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2007.
17. Culyer AJ. Deliberative processes in decisions about health care technologies: combining different types of evidence, values, algorithms and people. London: Office of Health Economics; 2009.
18. Griffin S, Claxton K, Palmer S, Sculpher M. Dangerous omissions: the consequences of ignoring decision uncertainty. Health Econ. 2011;20:212-24.
19. Towse A, Garrison LP Jr. Can't get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help? Toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):93-102.
20. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Interim document to accompany the 1995 guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the PBAC. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing; 2000.
21. Harris AH, Hill SR, Chin G, Li JJ, Walkom E. The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for drugs in Australia: a retrospective analysis. Med Decision Making. 2008;28(5):713-22.
22. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. 3rd ed. Ottawa: CADTH; 2006.
23. Patented Medicines Prices Review Board. Compendium of policies, guidelines and procedures: updated June 2011. PMPRB: Ottawa; 2011.
24. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. ISPOR global health care systems roadmap: France - pharmaceuticals. Lawrenceville: ISPOR; 2009.
25. International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. ISPOR global health care systems roadmap: Italy-pharmaceuticals. Lawrenceville: ISPOR; 2008.
26. Japan Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association. Pharmaceutical regulations in Japan. Tokyo: JPMA; 2011.
27. LFN. General guidelines for economic evaluations from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Board (LFNAR 2003:2). Stockholm: LFN; 2003.