ABSTRACT
With this retrospective study, we analyzed the negotiation subject, drug type, drug access mechanism, negotiation link and negotiation result of drug negotiation in typical regions at home and abroad.In foreign countries, drug negotiation mechanism has been implemented for many years, and many countries have established a relatively perfect negotiation system.We selected 8 typical countries and regions for which we statistically analyzed the negotiation subject, drug type, drug access mechanism, negotiation link and negotiation result of drug negotiation and these include the United States, Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, South Korea and Taiwan.However, in recent years some Chinese medical insurance department carried out pilot works on drug negotiations, and they got some successful results of the implementation of practical experience.Eight typical Chinese regions were also selected for statistical analysis, and these include Zhejiang, Hunan, Jiangsu, Jiangxi, Chengdu and Qingdao.From the analysis of the comparison of drug negotiation mechanism in domestic and foreign typical regional, we found that foreign regional drug negotiation mechanism is more mature and perfect, while in the domestic areas the mechanism is still poor at a certain extent as compared to foreign countries.We should learn from the successful experience of foreign countries and also establish and improve the negotiation mechanism that is suitable for China''s national conditions.
ABSTRACT
Objective:The aim of the present study was to conduct an international comparison of the high-val-ue drugs payment systems of some selected countries, and introduce them to the Chinese context. Australia, America and Germany's high-value drugs payment systems were selected to serve as references for China. Methods: The main content and characteristics of three countries' payment systems were analyzed in four aspects:expenditure copayment mode, paid-scope selection, drug price negotiation, and drug rational use management which were then compared with the Chinese status. Results:Through the difference in healthcare system tradition, the above countries have vari-ous copayment mode, but they all select paid-drug by cost-effectiveness analysis with corresponding control measures. Conclusions:China should: establish a co-payment mode for the high-value drugs on the basis of a critical illness medical insurance found;build a national pharmaco-economic evaluation index system and improve the national nego-tiation superiority, while emphasizing on risk-sharing mechanism; and make series specifications to guarantee the drug to be rationally used.