Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Front Pharmacol ; 10: 487, 2019.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31139080

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Reimbursement policies influence access of patients to orphan drugs in the European countries. OBJECTIVES: To provide a comprehensive description of orphan drug reimbursement policies and to assess reimbursement decision-making process in the EU-CEE countries as well as the impact of the type of approval and disease on reimbursement decisions. METHODS: For each drug, the information regarding conditional approval or approval under exceptional circumstances was obtained from the EMA website. The reimbursement status for analyzed drugs was collected in a questionnaire survey performed in a group of experts in reimbursement policy. The agreement between countries was assessed using the κ coefficient, nominal variables tests were compared using the χ2 test or the Fisher exact test. The impact of the EMA's conditional approval and approval under exceptional circumstances was assessed using logistic regression and presented as an odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: The analysis revealed that most orphan drugs were authorized for the treatment of oncological or metabolic diseases [36 drugs (38%) and 22 drugs (23%), respectively]. The shares of reimbursed orphan drugs varied significantly (p = 0.0031) from 6.3% in Latvia to 27.4% in Poland. No correlation (r = 0.02; p = 0.9583) with GDP per capita was observed. The highest agreement in reimbursement decisions was observed between Estonia and Lithuania, and the lowest - between Estonia and Latvia, with kappa of 0.69 and 0.11, respectively. Significant impact of the type of approval and reimbursement status was observed for Czechia, Lithuania and Slovakia where conditional approval and exceptional circumstances negatively influenced reimbursement decision. Type of disease has significant influence on reimbursement decision in 4 out of 10 analyzed countries with significant outweigh of positive decisions for oncological diseases. CONCLUSION: In considered countries specific regulations on reimbursement of orphan drugs are valid but in Lithuania and Romania no formal HTA process was employed; in case of some countries higher ICER values for orphans are used. The share of reimbursed orphan drugs varied significantly across the countries, but it was not associated with GDP per capita.

2.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 33(3): 339-344, 2017 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28438231

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: In the Czech Republic, the health technology assessment (HTA) approaches have been implemented in evaluation of medicinal products since 2008. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the implementation of HTA and different levels thereof in the evaluation process conducted by the State Institute for Drug Control (SUKL) and to describe the impact of HTA on the entrance of new medicinal entities into out-patient healthcare system including highly innovative and orphan drugs. METHODS: Materials supporting this overview were collected using the records in the database of administrative proceedings of SUKL, in-house standard operating procedures, and the legislation in force. Based on these sources as well as the hands-on knowledge of the current practice, a brief description of the general rules of administrative proceedings involving HTA of varying complexity was elaborated. Characteristic features of the individual types of proceedings, basic differences in the complexity of HTA employed, and its most important challenges were summarized. RESULTS: In Czech Republic, HTA in the formal administrative proceedings ensures a transparent process of introduction of new medicinal products into clinical practice and leaves space for restriction of reimbursement conditions to minimize budget impact. CONCLUSIONS: As a robust as well as pragmatic HTA methodology has been implemented by SUKL, relevant stakeholders (marketing authorization holders, Health Care Funds, clinical expert groups) are now able to influence reimbursement of new technologies.


Subject(s)
Drug and Narcotic Control/organization & administration , Prescription Drugs/standards , Technology Assessment, Biomedical/organization & administration , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Czech Republic , Delivery of Health Care/organization & administration , Drug and Narcotic Control/economics , Drug and Narcotic Control/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Insurance, Health, Reimbursement , Off-Label Use/standards , Orphan Drug Production/standards , Technology Assessment, Biomedical/economics , Technology Assessment, Biomedical/legislation & jurisprudence
3.
Front Pharmacol ; 8: 892, 2017.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29326583

ABSTRACT

Objectives: The aim of this study was to review reimbursement environment as well as pricing and reimbursement requirements for drugs in selected Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) countries. Methods: A questionnaire-based survey was performed in the period from November 2016 to March 2017 among experts involved in reimbursement matters from CEE countries: Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Romania. A review of requirements for reimbursement and implications of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) was performed to compare the issues in above-mentioned countries. For each specified country, data for reimbursement costs, total pharmaceutical budget, and total public health care budget in the years 2014 and 2015 were also collected. Questionnaires were distributed via emails and feedback data were obtained in the same way. Additional questions, if any, were also submitted to respondents by email. Pricing and reimbursement data were valid for March 2017. Results: The survey revealed that the relation of drug reimbursement costs to total public healthcare spending ranged from 0.12 to 0.21 in the year 2014 and 2015 (median value). It also revealed that pricing criteria for drugs, employed in the CEE countries, were quite similar. External reference pricing as well as internal reference pricing were common in mentioned countries. Positive reimbursement lists were valid in all countries of the CEE region, negative ones were rarely used; reimbursement decisions were regularly revised and updated in the majority of countries. Copayment was common and available levels of reimbursement differed within and between the countries and ranged from 20 to 100%. Risk-sharing schemes were often in use, especially in the case of innovative, expensive drugs. Generic substitution was also possible in all analyzed CEE countries, while some made it mandatory. HTA was carried out in almost all of the considered CEE countries and HTA dossier was obligatory for submitting a pricing and reimbursement application. Conclusions: Pricing and reimbursement requirements are quite similar in the CEE region although some differences were identified. HTA evaluations are commonly used in considered countries.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...