ABSTRACT
Regulation of drug prices that ensures adequate access to effective treatments and promotes innovation is a global challenge. In the United States, the government does not regulate drug prices when they come onto market. On the other hand, in countries such as France and Brazil, government agencies are responsible for setting up price limits by leveraging the interests of the companies and the countries' population. In Brazil, safety and efficacy of drugs are regulated by the Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency, and drug prices are regulated by the Pharmaceutical Market Regulation Chamber with a participation of Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency. Here, we introduce the current challenges faced by the Brazilian government in the drug price regulation and present proposed initiatives aiming to streamline access to innovative treatments for its citizens.
Subject(s)
Cost Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Drug Costs/legislation & jurisprudence , Government Regulation , Brazil , Cost Control/methods , Delivery of Health Care/legislation & jurisprudence , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Humans , International Cooperation , Rare Diseases/drug therapy , Rare Diseases/economicsABSTRACT
Area monitoring is a fundamental test at radiodiagnostic facilities to maintain an acceptable level of radiation exposure for employees and members of the public. Experimental measurements were taken in an ionising radiation calibration laboratory. Four area monitor instruments were used. Dose and dose rate measurements were measured in integrated and rate operating modes. The results show that precautions are necessary where the area monitor uses exposure times of ≤2 s. When taking measurements in rate mode for times ≤2 s, the area monitors evaluated show a tendency to underestimate dose rate, the inaccuracy was 41 %, and varied between 34 and 45 % for different energies. It is highly recommendable to work in integrated mode, inaccuracy varied from 2 to 35 %. For measurements taken with exposure times of ≥3 s, the average inaccuracy was 15 % and the range was between 2 and 41 %.