Coverage decisions and the court: A public health perspective on glucosamine reimbursement in Thailand

Health Systems and Reform

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2016, Pages 106-111

  Tantivess, Sripen ^a   Tangcharoensathien, Viroj ^a  

^a MINISTRY OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (Thailand)

Author keywords

Court; Coverage decisions; Glucosamine; Health benefits; Scientific evidence; Thailand

Indexed keywords

EID: 85013656941     PISSN: 23288604     EISSN: 23288620     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/23288604.2016.1128514     Document Type: Note

References (29)

1. Tangcharoensathien V, ed. The Kingdom of Thailand health system review. Health Systems in Transition. Manila: World Health Organization, Regional Office for the Western Pacific; 2015.
2. Holloway K. Drug policy and use of pharmaceuticals in health care delivery. New Delhi: World Health Organization, Regional Office for South East Asia; 2012. Available at http://www.searo. who.int/entity/medicines/Thailand_situational_analysis.pdf
3. Limwattananon S, Limwattananon C, Cheawchanwattana A, Silkavute P, Tangcharoensathien V. Forecasted expenditure due to use of expensive drugs in Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme: a comparison with Universal Health Coverage Scheme [in Thai]. J Health Syst Res 2011; 5(2): 170-180.
4. Secretariat of the Cabinet. Measures to control drug expenditures in the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme [in Thai]. Bangkok: Secretariat of the Cabinet; 2010.
5. Teerawattananon Y, Tangcharoensathien V, Tantivess S, Mills A. Health sector regulation in Thailand: recent progress and the future agenda. Health Policy 2003; 63(3): 323-338.
6. Tantivess S, Pѐerez Velasco R, Yothasamut J, Mohara A, Lim-prayoonyong H, Teerawattananon Y. Efficiency or equity?: value judgments in coverage decisions in Thailand. J Health Organ Manag 2012; 26(3): 331-342.
7. 7[7] Teerawattananon Y, Tritasavit N, Suchonvanich N, Kingkaew P. The use of economic evaluation for guiding the pharmaceutical reimbursement list in Thailand. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes 2014; 108(7): 397-404.
8. Subcommittee for Development of the National List of Essential Medicines. Ethical code of conduct in the development of the National List of Essential Medicines [in Thai]. 2008. Available at http://drug.fda.moph.go.th:81/nlem.in.th/princi ples/medicine/ethic (accessed 14 September 2015)
9. Ministry of Finance. Reimbursement for treatment in the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme [in Thai]. Letter No. MOF 0422.2 C.111. Bangkok: Ministry of Finance; 2012.
10. Ministry of Finance. Reimbursement for treatment in the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme [in Thai]. Letter No. MOF 0526.5 C.65-66. Bangkok: Ministry of Finance; 1999.
11. Health Insurance System Research Office. Proposed measures to contain drug expenditures in the Civil Servant Medical Benefit Scheme, fiscal year 2010 [in Thai]. Nonthaburi: Health Insurance System Research Office; 2010.
12. Danwattana S, Nawachinkul T. Analysis of news coverage in removing glucosamine from the list of reimbursement, a reflection of advocacy for the CSMBS reform processes [in Thai]. J Health Syst Res 2011; 5(2): 138-148.
13. Thai Post. Chairperson of the National List of Essential Medicines Committee reveals: glucosamine is not cost effective [in Thai]. Thai Post 23 February 2011: 8.
14. Manager Online Newspaper. Different perspectives on osteoarthritis drug—glucosamine [in Thai]. Manager Online 24 February 2011. Available at http://www.manager.co.th/QOL/ViewNews.aspx?News IDD9540000022665&HtmlD1&TabIDD2& (accessed 22 July 2015)
15. Central Administrative Court. The case of administrative organization issuing unlawful regulation, Mr. AA (alias) vs. Ministry of Finance. Decided case number 502/2558, 26 February 2015 [in Thai].
16. Royal College of Orthopedic Surgeons of Thailand. Guidelines for the treatment of osteoarthritis of knee 2010 [in Thai]. Bangkok: Royal College of Orthorpedic Surgeons of Thailand; 2010.
17. Chieffi AL, Barata RCB. Legal suits: pharmaceutical industry strategies to introduce new drugs in the Brazilian public healthcare system. Rev Saѐude Pѐublica 2010; 44(3): 421-428.
18. 18[18] Vargas-Pelѐaez C, Rover MR, Leite SN, Rossi Buenaventura F, Farias MR. Right to health, essential medicines, and lawsuits for access to medicines—a scoping study. Soc Sci Med 2014; 121(November): 48-55.
19. Daniels N, Charvel S, Gelpi AH, Porteny T, Urrutia J. Role of the courts in the progressive realization of the right to health: between the threat and the promise of judicialization in Mexico. Health Sys Ref 2015; 1(3): 229-234.
20. The Constitutional Court of South Africa. Soobramoney versus Minister of Health (Kwazulu-Natal), Case CCT32/97, decided on 27 November 1997.
21. Syrett K, Health technology appraisal and the courts: accountability for reasonableness and the judicial model of procedural justice. Health Econ Policy Law 2011; 6(4): 469-488.
22. Graham R, Mancher M, Wolman DM, Greenfield S, Steinberg E. eds. Clinical practice guidelines we can trust. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences; 2011.
23. Woolf SW, Grol R, Hutchinson A, Eccles M, Grimshaw J. Potential benefits, limitations, and harms of clinical guidelines. BMJ 1999; 318(7182): 527-530.
24. Moreira J, Jaramillo E, Anselmi M, Sempertegui R, Ortiz P, Mena MB, Tognoni G. Appraisal of five clinical guidelines for the management of hypertension in Andean countries and Europe. World J Cardiovasc Dis 2014; 4(5): 211-216.
25. Hu S, Wu L, Fang X, Xu W, Shen G. Clinical practice guidelines for hypertension in China: a systematic review of the methodological quality. BMJ Open 2015; 5(7): e008099.
26. Alonso-Coello P, Irfan A, Sola I, Gich I, Delgado-Noguera M, Rigau D, Tort S, Bonfill X, Burgers J, Schunemann H. The quality of clinical practice guidelines over the last two decades: a systematic review of guideline appraisal studies. Qual Saf Health Care 2010; 19(6): 1-7.
27. Lenzer J, Hoffman J, Furberg C, Ioannidis J. Ensuring the integrity of clinical practice guidelines: a tool for protecting patients. BMJ 2013; 347: f5535.
28. Brouwers MW, Kho ME, Browman GP, Burgers JS, Cluzeau F, Feder G, Fervers B, Graham ID, Grimshaw J, Hanna SE, et al. for the AGREE Next Steps Consortium. AGREE II: advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare. Can Med Assoc J 2010; 182(18): E839-E842.
29. Rosoff AJ. Evidence-based medicine and the law: the courts confront clinical practice guidelines. J Health Polit Policy Law 2001; 26(2): 327-368.