Dividend policy issues in the European pharmaceutical industry: new empirical evidence.

This paper examines dividend policy issues in the European pharmaceutical industry. This sector is of particular interest because of the high research and development expenditures and the associated risks characterizing the business models of many firms in this industry. In fact, from the perspective of corporate finance theory, this is a particular challenge for the managers of these corporations that may also have implications for the dividend policy implemented by the firms forming this sector. Moreover, the level of internal financing and litigation risks also seem to be high in the pharmaceutical industry. These facts could also affect the payout policy of the firms. Employing techniques of time series analysis, there is no evidence for dividend signaling and clear evidence for dividend smoothing in the European pharmaceutical industry. Given that dividend increases under certain assumptions can negatively affect the firms' ability to finance new investments in general and research and development projects in particular, these results of our empirical investigations could be described as highly plausible.

Evaluation of two family-based intervention programs for children affected by rare disease and their families - research network (CARE-FAM-NET): study protocol for a rater-blinded, randomized, controlled, multicenter trial in a 2x2 factorial design.

BACKGROUND: Families of children with rare diseases (i.e., not more than 5 out of 10,000 people are affected) are often highly burdened with fears, insecurities and concerns regarding the affected child and its siblings. Although families caring for children with rare diseases are known to be at risk for mental disorders, the evaluation of special programs under high methodological standards has not been conducted so far. Moreover, the implementation of interventions for this group into regular care has not yet been accomplished in Germany. The efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a family-based intervention will be assessed. METHODS/DESIGN: The study is a 2x2 factorial randomized controlled multicenter trial conducted at 17 study centers throughout Germany. Participants are families with children and adolescents affected by a rare disease aged 0 to 21 years. Families in the face-to-face intervention CARE-FAM, online intervention WEP-CARE or the combination of both will be treated over a period of roughly 6 months. Topics discussed in the interventions include coping, family relations, and social support. Families in the control condition will receive treatment as usual. The primary efficacy outcome is parental mental health, measured by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-I) by blinded external raters. Further outcomes will be assessed from the parents' as well as the children's perspective. Participants are investigated at baseline, 6, 12 and 18 months after randomization. In addition to the assessment of various psychosocial outcomes, a comprehensive health-economic evaluation will be performed. DISCUSSION: This paper describes the implementation and evaluation of two family-based intervention programs for Children Affected by Rare Disease and their Family's Network (CARE-FAM-NET) in German standard care. A methodologically challenging study design is used to reflect the complexity of the actual medical care situation. This trial could be an important contribution to the improvement of care for this highly burdened group. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00015859 (registered 18 December 2018) and ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT04339465 (registered 8 April 2020). Protocol Version: 15 August 2020 (Version 6.1). Trial status: Recruitment started on 1 January 2019 and will be completed on 31 March 2021.

Use and importance of different information sources among patients with rare diseases and their relatives over time: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Finding reliable information on one of more than 7000 rare diseases is a major challenge for those affected. Since rare diseases are defined only by the prevalence criterion, a multitude of heterogeneous diseases are included. Common to all, however, are difficulties regarding information access. Even though various quantitative studies have analyzed the use of different information sources for specific rare diseases, little is known about the use of information sources for different rare diseases, how users rate these information sources based on their experiences, and how the use and importance of these information sources change over time. METHODS: Fifty-five patients with a variety of rare diseases and 13 close relatives participated in qualitative interviews. For these interviews, a semi-structured guideline was developed, piloted, and revised. Data analysis involved a qualitative content analysis developed by Philipp Mayring. RESULTS: The participants considered internet as the most important and widespread information source, especially for early information. Although patients have difficulty dealing with information obtained online, they consider online searching a quick and practical option to gather information. During the course of the disease, personal contact partners, especially self-help associations and specialized doctors, become more important. This is also because information provided online is sometimes insufficiently detailed to answer their information needs, which can be complemented by information from doctors and self-help. CONCLUSIONS: People rarely use just one type of source, but rather refer to different sources and informants. The source used depends on the type of information sought as well as other person-related factors such as preexisting knowledge and the disease stage. To improve people's information searching and connect them with medical specialists in rare diseases, a central information portal on rare diseases might be a suitable access point to provide free and quality assured information for patients, caregivers, and physicians. This would allow not only patients but also doctors to find quality assured information on symptoms and therapies as well as patient associations and specialized doctors.

Patient-reported data informing early benefit assessment of rare diseases in Germany: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Since the implementation of the Regulation on Patient Integration (2003), the Act on the Reorganization of the Pharmaceutical Market (2011), and the Patient Rights Law (2013), the inclusion of patient perspectives has been further anchored in the German early benefit assessment process. During the assessment of rare disease interventions, patient perspectives are particularly important, as clinical studies are often designed acknowledging small samples and patients suffering from severe symptoms and the chronic course of the disease. Therefore, our research question is whether patient perspectives are considered as part of early benefit assessments for rare diseases. We also strive to examine how patient perspectives are methodologically elicited and presented. METHODS: Our empirical evidence comes from a systematic review of orphan drug value dossiers submitted to the German Federal Joint Committee as well as the corresponding evaluations conducted between January 1, 2011 and March 1, 2019 (n = 81). Data on patient perspective integration were extracted using the following patient-reported outcome subcategories: clinical patient-reported outcomes, health-related quality of life, patient preferences, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: The analysis demonstrates the specific relevance of patient-reported outcomes raised as part of the medical data set and presented during the early benefit assessment process. They are predominantly presented in the form of health-related quality of life data (n = 75%) and clinical outcomes (n = 49%). Preferences (n = 2%) and satisfaction (n = 1%) are still rarely presented, although the heated methodological discussion in Germany would suggest otherwise. While various methodologies for the integration of clinical outcomes and quality of life data were found, presenting data on satisfaction and preferences still lacks methodological rigor. The German Federal Joint Committee has not yet integrated these data in their decision text. Clinical outcomes and quality of life have been included in 46% and 73% of the cases, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The underlying analysis demonstrates that there is still a relative high potential for the regular and systematic inclusion of patient perspectives within the early benefit assessment process for rare diseases. In particular, patient preferences and patient satisfaction are still rarely included suggesting the need for a clear-cut methodological foundation and incentives.

Integrating patient perspectives in medical decision-making: a qualitative interview study examining potentials within the rare disease information exchange process in practice.

BACKGROUND: Many European countries have recently implemented national rare disease plans. Although the network is strengthening, especially on the macro and meso levels, patients still go a long way through healthcare systems, with many health professionals involved and scarce evidence to gather. Specifically, patient involvement in the form of shared decision-making can offer further potential to increase healthcare systems' efficiency on a micro level. Therefore, we examine the implementation of the shared decision-making concept thus far, and explore whether efficiency potentials exist-which are particularly relevant within the rare disease field-and how they can be triggered. METHODS: Our empirical evidence comes from 101 interviews conducted from March to September 2014 in Germany; 55 patients, 13 family members, and 33 health professionals participated in a qualitative interview study. Transcripts were analyzed using a directed qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The interviews indicate that the decision-making process is increasingly relevant in practice. In comparison, however, the shared decision-making agreement itself was rarely reported. A majority of interactions are dominated by individual, informed decision-making, followed by paternalistic approaches. The patient-physician relationship was characterized by a distorted trust-building process, which is affected by not only dependencies due to the diseases' severity and chronic course, but an often-reported stigmatization of patients as stimulants. Moreover, participation was high due to a pronounced engagement of those affected, diminishing as patients' strength vanish during their odyssey through health care systems. The particular roles of "expert patients" or "lay experts" in the rare disease field were revealed, with further potential in integrating the gathered information. CONCLUSIONS: The study reveals the named efficiency potentials, which are unique for rare diseases and make the further integration of shared decision-making very attractive, facilitating diagnostics and disease management. It is noteworthy that integrating shared decision-making in the rare disease field does not only require strengthening the position of patients but also that of physicians. Efforts can be made to further integrate the concept within political frameworks to trigger the identified potential and assess the health-economic impact.

Costs of isocyanate-related occupational diseases: A systematic review.

Although isocyanates are increasingly used in manufacturing and workplace exposure to isocyanates is widely recognized as one of the most frequent causes for occupational lung and skin diseases, little is known about the economic burden on the affected individual and the society. This study provides an overview on costs of occupational diseases related to isocyanates. We performed a systematic literature search of studies in the electronic databases of the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information, and the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. We extracted the key characteristics of the studies and performed a study quality assessment. We identified eight studies on the costs of illness, of which five focused on occupational lung diseases and three on occupational skin diseases. Further, eight studies calculated loss of income/compensation payments. Out of the 16 identified articles, only two reported costs directly attributable to isocyanate-induced diseases (asthma). Studies were hardly comparable because they differed substantially in their methodological approaches. Moreover, the quality assessment of the studies revealed substantial limitations. While a wide range of isocyanate-related costs was identified, consequences of isocyanate-related occupational diseases were considerable in terms of societal costs and loss of income. In most studies, indirect costs were the main cost driver. There is a need for high-quality cost of illness studies on isocyanate-induced diseases stratified by degree of severity and sex. Such studies provide valuable information to develop preventive strategies and set priorities for measures to lower the burden of professional health risks.

Advanced therapy medicinal products and health technology assessment principles and practices for value-based and sustainable healthcare.

BACKGROUND: Advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs) are beginning to reach European markets, and questions are being asked about their value for patients and how healthcare systems should pay for them. OBJECTIVES: To identify and discuss potential challenges of ATMPs in view of current health technology assessment (HTA) methodology-specifically economic evaluation methods-in Europe as it relates to ATMPs, and to suggest potential solutions to these challenges. METHODS: An Expert Panel reviewed current HTA principles and practices in relation to the specific characteristics of ATMPs. RESULTS: Three key topics were identified and prioritised for discussion-uncertainty, discounting, and health outcomes and value. The panel discussed that evidence challenges linked to increased uncertainty may be mitigated by collection of follow-on data, use of value of information analysis, and/or outcomes-based contracts. For discount rates, an international, multi-disciplinary forum should be established to consider the economic, social and ethical implications of the choice of rate. Finally, consideration of the feasibility of assessing the value of ATMPs beyond health gain may also be key for decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: ATMPs face a challenge in demonstrating their value within current HTA frameworks. Consideration of current HTA principles and practices with regards to the specific characteristics of ATMPs and continued dialogue will be key to ensuring appropriate market access. CLASSIFICATION CODE: I.

Metadata Correction: Conceptualization and Implementation of the Central Information Portal on Rare Diseases: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.2196/resprot.7425.].

"Market withdrawals" of medicines in Germany after AMNOG: a comparison of HTA ratings and clinical guideline recommendations.

BACKGROUND: According to the AMNOG act, the German Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) determines the additional benefit of new medicines as a basis for subsequent price negotiations. Pharmaceutical companies may withdraw their medications from the market at any time during the process. This analysis aims to compare recommendations in clinical guidelines and HTA appraisals of medicines that were withdrawn from the German market since the introduction of AMNOG in 2011. METHODS: Medications withdrawn from the German market between January 2011 and June 2016 following benefit assessment were categorized as opt-outs (max. 2 weeks after start of price negotiations) or supply terminations (during or after further price negotiations). Related guidelines were systematically analyzed. For all withdrawals, therapeutic area, additional benefit rating and recommendation status in relevant clinical guidelines were assessed. RESULTS: Among 139 medications, 10 opt-outs and 12 supply terminations were identified. Twenty-one out of 22 withdrawn medicines (95%) received 'no additional benefit' appraisal by the G-BA (average 'no additional benefit' rating for all AMNOG products: 47%). Of the 22 medicines, 15 (68%) were recommended by at least one guideline at the time of benefit assessment and 18 (82%) on 1 June 2016. Heterogeneity among guidelines was high. Acceptance of clinical trial endpoints was different between G-BA appraisals and clinical guidelines. CONCLUSION: Our analysis revealed considerable differences across clinical guidelines as well as between clinical guidelines and HTA appraisals of the medicines that were withdrawn from the German market. Better alignment of the clinical perspective and close collaboration between all involved parties is required to achieve and maintain optimization of patient care.

Conceptualization and Implementation of the Central Information Portal on Rare Diseases: Protocol for a Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, public and political interest has focused on people living with rare diseases and their health concerns. Due to the large number of different types of rare diseases and the sizable number of patients, taking action to improve the life of those affected is gaining importance. In 2013, the federal government of Germany adopted a national action plan for rare diseases, including the call to establish a central information portal on rare diseases (Zentrales Informationsportal über seltene Erkrankungen, ZIPSE). OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study, therefore, was to conduct scientific research on how such a portal must be designed to meet the needs of patients, their families, and medical professionals, and to provide high-quality information for information seekers. METHODS: We chose a 3-step procedure to develop a needs-based prototype of a central information portal. In the first step, we determined the information needs of patients with rare diseases, their relatives, and health care professionals by means of qualitative interviews and their content-analytical evaluation. On the basis of this, we developed the basic structure of the portal. In the second step, we identified quality criteria for websites on rare diseases to ensure that the information linked with ZIPSE meets the quality demands. Therefore, we gathered existing criteria catalogs and discussed them in an expert workshop. In the third step, we implemented and tested the developed prototypical information portal. RESULTS: A portal page was configured and made accessible on the Web. The structure of ZIPSE was based on the findings from 108 qualitative interviews with patients, their relatives, and health care professionals, through which numerous information needs were identified. We placed particularly important areas of information, such as symptoms, therapy, research, and advisory services, on the start page. Moreover, we defined 13 quality criteria, referring to factors such as author information, creation date, and privacy, enabling links with high-quality information. Moreover, 19 users tested all the developed routines based on usability and comprehensibility. Subsequently, we improved the visual presentation of search results and other important search functions. CONCLUSIONS: The implemented information portal, ZIPSE, provides high-quality information on rare diseases from a central point of access. By integrating the targeted groups as well as different experts on medical information during the construction, the website can assure an improved search for information for users. ZIPSE can also serve as a model for other Web-based information systems in the field of rare diseases. REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER: RR1-10.2196/7425.

German Value Set for the EQ-5D-5L.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to develop a value set for EQ-5D-5L based on the societal preferences of the German population. As the first country to do so, the study design used the improved EQ-5D-5L valuation protocol 2.0 developed by the EuroQol Group, including a feedback module as internal validation and a quality control process that was missing in the first wave of EQ-5D-5L valuation studies. METHODS: A representative sample of the general German population (n = 1158) was interviewed using a composite time trade-off and a discrete choice experiment under close quality control. Econometric modeling was used to estimate values for all 3125 possible health states described by EQ-5D-5L. The value set was based on a hybrid model including all available information from the composite time trade-off and discrete choice experiment valuations without any exclusions due to data issues. RESULTS: The final German value set was constructed from a combination of a conditional logit model for the discrete choice experiment data and a censored at -1 Tobit model for the composite time trade-off data, correcting for heteroskedasticity. The value set had logically consistent parameter estimates (p < 0.001 for all coefficients). The predicted EQ-5D-5L index values ranged from -0.661 to 1. CONCLUSIONS: This study provided values for the health states of the German version of EQ-5D-5L representing the preferences of the German population. The study successfully employed for the first time worldwide the improved protocol 2.0. The value set enables the use of the EQ-5D-5L instrument in economic evaluations and in clinical studies.

Telephone health services in the field of rare diseases: a qualitative interview study examining the needs of patients, relatives, and health care professionals in Germany.

BACKGROUND: Rare diseases are, by definition, very serious and chronic diseases with a high negative impact on quality of life. Approximately 350 million people worldwide live with rare diseases. The resulting high disease burden triggers health information search, but helpful, high-quality, and up-to-date information is often hard to find. Therefore, the improvement of health information provision has been integrated in many national plans for rare diseases, discussing the telephone as one access option. In this context, this study examines the need for a telephone service offering information for people affected by rare diseases, their relatives, and physicians. METHODS: In total, 107 individuals participated in a qualitative interview study conducted in Germany. Sixty-eight individuals suffering from a rare disease or related to somebody with rare diseases and 39 health care professionals took part. Individual interviews were conducted using a standardized semi-structured questionnaire. Interviews were analysed using the qualitative content analysis, triangulating patients, relatives, and health care professionals. The fulfilment of qualitative data processing standards has been controlled for. RESULTS: Out of 68 patients and relatives and 39 physicians, 52 and 18, respectively, advocated for the establishment of a rare diseases telephone service. Interviewees expected a helpline to include expert staffing, personal contact, good availability, low technical barriers, medical and psychosocial topics of counselling, guidance in reducing information chaos, and referrals. Health care professionals highlighted the importance of medical topics of counselling-in particular, differential diagnostics-and referrals. CONCLUSIONS: Therefore, the need for a national rare diseases helpline was confirmed in this study. Due to limited financial resources, existing offers should be adapted in a stepwise procedure in accordance with the identified attributes.

[Health Science Research with Primary Care Routine Data From Electronic Patient Records: the BeoNet Registry]. / Gesundheitswissenschaftliche Forschung mit primärärztlichen Routinedaten der elektronischen Patientenakte: das BeoNet-Register.

Reliable current information is needed for daily patient care and the health system, but comprehensive data, especially from primary care, are scarce and/or hard to access. The BeoNet Register-Database (BNR) aims to depict quality of medical care in Germany using routine data and with no additional documentation or costs for GPs. Registry design, data structure and database use will be demonstrated using chronic obstructive lung disease (COPD) as an example. The BNR is moving through pilot- and roll-out phases. Participating practices provide standardized information about (1) master data (2) practice profile (3) infrastructure and documentation systems. The routinely documented data will be pseudonymized before transmission via standardized secure interfaces to the registry database. Practices can participate in studies in cooperation with BNR if informed consent is obtained from the patients. The registry data will be linked with questionnaires on health care utilization, quality of life and disease-specific parameters. Researchers and physicians can access quasi anonymized data in specific datasets extracted from the registry. Regular automatic data quality checks and feedback from GPs, patients and researchers enhance the quality of the registry. Performance and data analysis are continuously optimized. The data security concept has been approved and ethical approval is on hand. GPs, pediatricians and pneumologists from Hanover, Munich and Heidelberg participated in the pilot phase. The registry database currently holds 98497 patient IDs and related information. BNR contains more than the standard billing data collected by health insurers. The data are applicable to a wide range of health practices, health care and economics and disease development questions. Questionnaires have been generated, tested and are being distributed. First descriptive analyses of prevalence, age and gender have been performed. Quality and validity checks have been implemented. 2016 marks the roll-out phase of the BNR. Further recruitment of practices throughout Germany, data linkage with additional questionnaires, recruitment of patients for health care research projects, quality checks and data analysis of disease-specific costs and health-related quality of life in COPD are progressing with the overall aim of improving pulmonary healthcare strategies. The floor is now open for retro- and prospective cross-sectional and longitudinal studies.

Therapy preferences of patients with lung and colon cancer: a discrete choice experiment.

OBJECTIVES: There is increasing interest in studies that examine patient preferences to measure health-related outcomes. Understanding patients' preferences can improve the treatment process and is particularly relevant for oncology. In this study, we aimed to identify the subgroup-specific treatment preferences of German patients with lung cancer (LC) or colorectal cancer (CRC). METHODS: Six discrete choice experiment (DCE) attributes were established on the basis of a systematic literature review and qualitative interviews. The DCE analyses comprised generalized linear mixed-effects model and latent class mixed logit model. RESULTS: The study cohort comprised 310 patients (194 with LC, 108 with CRC, 8 with both types of cancer) with a median age of 63 (SD =10.66) years. The generalized linear mixed-effects model showed a significant (P<0.05) degree of association for all of the tested attributes. "Strongly increased life expectancy" was the attribute given the greatest weight by all patient groups. Using latent class mixed logit model analysis, we identified three classes of patients. Patients who were better informed tended to prefer a more balanced relationship between length and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) than those who were less informed. Class 2 (LC patients with low HRQoL who had undergone surgery) gave a very strong weighting to increased length of life. We deduced from Class 3 patients that those with a relatively good life expectancy (CRC compared with LC) gave a greater weight to moderate effects on HRQoL than to a longer life. CONCLUSION: Overall survival was the most important attribute of therapy for patients with LC or CRC. Differences in treatment preferences between subgroups should be considered in regard to treatment and development of guidelines. Patients' preferences were not affected by sex or age, but were affected by the cancer type, HRQoL, surgery status, and the main source of information on the disease.

[Priority setting and rationing of pharmaceuticals - an experimental analysis of discussion processes]. / Priorisierung und Rationierung von Arzneimittel ­ eine experimentelle Analyse von Diskussionsprozessen.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: In the face of rising expenditure among statutory sickness funds in Germany it is necessary to start a discussion about priority setting in the healthcare system. For a long time this issue has been avoided in healthcare debates. As a result, normative directives are still missing, which can lead to priority setting among healthcare providers in daily healthcare practice. Prioritization can be conducted at three different levels: at the government (macro), the institutional (meso), and the patient (micro) level. Surveys about societal preferences for different criteria exist; however, specifications on their respective weighting in the situation of approval and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals (meso) are missing. For this reason, the present study analyzed the implementation and weighting of the criteria for priority setting at the meso level, taking values and experiences of the participants into account. METHOD: Six qualitative focus groups were carried out with representatives from the fields of medicine, ethics, public health and economics. During the discussions four fictitious drugs for the treatment of different lung diseases were prioritized based on guidelines. The discussion processes were analyzed according to Bohnsack's documentary method. RESULTS: The criteria "quality of life", "life expectancy" and "other patient-relevant outcomes" were discussed in relation to each other. The evaluation of change in patient-relevant outcomes was difficult to perform for non-medical participants. The second argument concerned the criteria "costs", disease severity and "number of patients". Costs were given less weight, but were often used to support other criteria. Other challenges in reaching a consensus included emerging role conflicts between profession and personal opinion, and the transfer of the discussion to a different level of decision-making. DISCUSSION: In the discussions the problem of prioritizing did not arise from different preferences for prioritization criteria, but from the weighting of the criteria. The operationalization of the criteria seemingly depends on the decision-making situation, the participants' personal connection with the relevant disease and on the correspondence between evidence and personal experiences.

[Central information portal on rare diseases : Implementation of quality- and needs-oriented information management]. / Zentrales Informationsportal über seltene Erkrankungen : Umsetzung eines qualitäts- und bedarfsorientierten Informationsmanagements.

BACKGROUND: A central information portal on rare diseases (ZIPSE) has been conceptualized and implemented that allows patients, relatives and health care professionals to access quality-assured information. For this purpose, quality criteria have been developed specifically for rare diseases. At the same time, the information basis should take into account the specific needs of those interested. OBJECTIVES: The needs of patients and relatives regarding online-based information are analyzed. Based on this, we examined to what extent the information basis, which is available according to the ZIPSE quality criteria, can cover these needs. If necessary, measures have to be developed to ensure quality- as well as needs-oriented information management. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Qualitative interviews with patients and relatives were conducted, which were then evaluated using content analysis. Subsequently, a quantitative evaluation of the information on rare diseases in the portal was made. The research addresses how many websites do not fulfil the quality criteria, from which group of provider these websites originate and which criteria are not fulfilled. This is followed by a comparison of the quantitative and qualitative results. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: When looking for information on the Internet, the websites of self-help groups represent a significant source. These are perceived as very trustworthy and in the later course of the disease, offer detailed information on important information areas. Information websites from self-help groups, however, often do not meet quality requirements. Therefore, a transparent representation is made regarding the quality of the ZIPSE information pages. Pages that are not quality-assured can be actively requested, but will be clearly identified.

[Evaluation of family doctor-centred health care in Germany based on AOK Rheinland/Hamburg claims data]. / Evaluation der hausarztzentrierten Versorgung in Deutschland anhand von GKV-Routinedaten der AOK Rheinland/Hamburg.

BACKGROUND: Health insurance funds in Germany are obliged to offer family doctor-centred health care models (Hausarztzentrierte Versorgung, "HzV"). The participation is voluntary for the insured persons. Participants agree to utilise outpatient specialist care only if their family doctor or general practitioner ("gatekeeper") refers them to a specialist. The aim of this programme is to both strengthen the role of general practitioners and to avoid unnecessary specialist visits and double examinations. Moreover, the quality of care should increase and costs decrease. There is a controversial debate among health politicians whether these objectives can be achieved with current HzV contracts. Therefore, the aim of this project was to conduct an economic evaluation of family doctor-centred health care compared with the standard of care. METHODS: The analysis covered continuously insured adult HzV participants, who have been enrolled in the contract offered by a large German sickness fund (AOK Rheinland/Hamburg) since 2011. In addition, the analysis contained data of a control group which was three times larger than the intervention group. Logistic regression analysis with relevant characteristics (social demographics, health care utilisation, cost, and Charlson Comorbidity Index) of participants and non-participants was conducted to assess the likelihood of participation in the HzV contract. With the subsequent propensity score matching, differences in the characteristics between the control and the intervention group were compensated for the base year 2010 in order to be able to evaluate the influence of the HzV contract in subsequent years. Study objectives were to analyse differences in costs as well as utilisation of services between HzV participants and the control group. RESULTS: The intervention group consisted of 25,201 HzV participants with an average age of 49.5 years [SD: 17.9]. 54.4% of them were female. The HzV participants showed significantly higher costs compared to the control group in the first and in the second year after enrolment. Drug costs in the first year added up to an average of 499 EUR [SD: 2,021] compared to 477 EUR [SD: 2,050] in the control group. In the second year, the drug costs were 544 EUR [SD: 2,758] in the intervention group and 522 EUR [SD: 2,341] in the control group. In addition, the analysis showed a higher number of specialist referrals issued by general practitioners in the intervention group. However, the length of stay in hospitals was shown to be decreasing for HzV participants. DISCUSSION: The higher costs and use of services indicate a higher morbidity (Charlson Comorbidity Index and in comparison to the German population) of HzV participants. The cost level increases in both groups, but within the group of HzV participants, the relative cost increase in the second year was lower than in the control group. The results of this study demonstrate that family doctor-centred health care is assumed to be more efficient in the long term. With regard to the objective of these contracts, quality improvement may not be achievable at the same time as cost savings. As our data set cannot distinguish between changes of patient behaviour and physician behaviour, the results of our study need to be interpreted with caution.