ABSTRACT
Objective To provide reference for the adjustment of provincial health insurance directory by comparing the differences between 2017 and 2009 edition of National Health Insurance Directory(NHID) and exploring the characteristics of NHID adjustment. Methods The Excel 2016 was used to carry out a comparative analysis of the drugs included in the two editions of NHID from the 4 aspects such as classification,drug name,dosage form and payment range. Results The adjustments of NHID in 2017 include drug variety,payment range,drug classification and coding.A total of 339 drugs were added, of which 133 were chemical drugs with a growth rate of 11.4%,and 206 were Traditional Chinese Medicine with a growth rate of 20.0%.In addition,dosage form was added in 149 drug varieties.The adjustment mainly focuses on chronic diseases such as hypertension and diabetes,serious diseases such as cancer,innovative drugs,and pediatric drugs. Conclusion The adjustment of 2017 edition of NHID embodied the policy thinking of "filling,selecting,supporting innovation and encouraging competition". Moreover,the drug classification,name and coding are more scientific and reasonable.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE:To provide a reference for innovative drugs to enter the health insurance directory smoothly and pro-mote the rapid development of pharmaceutical industry in China. METHODS:Based on related policy study of foreign and domes-tic innovative drugs entering the health insurance directory,the policy barriers of innovative drugs entering the health insurance di-rectory were analyzed and the countermeasures were put forward. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS:In China,the foundation of drug selection was not objective enough;the review results were so vulnerable to subjective views because of the experts selection mech-anism;the health insurance directory deletion mechanism was deficient;the waiting time for innovative drugs entering the health in-surance directory was too long;innovative drugs negotiation mechanism was imperfect,etc. It is recommended that forcibly requir-ing pharmaceutical companies should provid the related data about pharmacoeconomic evaluation;the independence and pluralism of the expert group should be enhanced;drugs in the health insurance directory should be secondarily evaluated regularly;the inno-vative drugs should be given the green channel;innovative drug price negotiation rules should be unified to promote drug informa-tion sharing.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To explore the coexistence of "Medical Insurance List" and "Essential Drugs List". METHODS: A comparative similarities and differences analysis of the scope, role, to develop the basis for the implementation of the effectiveness between the "medical insurance directory" and "Essential Drugs List" was carried out. RESULTS & CONCLUSION: The new edition of "Essential Drugs List" is to ease the contradiction of coexistence in long-term, but they are difficult to reconcile in short-term.