Literature DB >> 11465305

Lifestyle drugs: determining their value and who should pay.

D Mitrany1.   

Abstract

Lifestyle drugs are used to alleviate or enhance: (i) lifestyle problems or conditions, regardless of the cause; and (ii) health problems for which the underlying cause is in the realm of personal responsibility. It is the particular use of a drug, rather than its inherent properties, that determines whether it is called a lifestyle drug. The increasing availability of, and high demand for, lifestyle drugs contributes to their expanding role in healthcare. In the absence of objective pharmacoeconomic data, the subjective value or cost effectiveness of these agents varies among patients, medical professionals, regulatory agencies and payors. Most nations rely on value systems that are implied, rather than clearly articulated. The aims of largely institutional payors, and the individual patients and their physicians do not always coincide, creating tensions over who should pay for these drugs. Cost-sharing between patient and payer, drug limitations and prior authorisation protocols are some methods used to manage access to these drugs. There is an urgent need to formulate coherent values, priorities and strategies for dealing with lifestyle drugs. To do this, local and national regulatory agencies, politicians, healthcare providers, insurers and patients need to formulate broad areas of consensus. Finally, we must not forget compassion for the patient as we apply the dictates of institutional policy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11465305     DOI: 10.2165/00019053-200119050-00001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics        ISSN: 1170-7690            Impact factor:   4.981


  14 in total

1.  Al wants more hair, less fat, and a better sex life ... and he wants his health plan to pay for it.

Authors:  J Greene
Journal:  Hosp Health Netw       Date:  1999-03

2.  Prescription costs become harder to swallow. Providers and payers get a big dose of reality with explosive spending and patient demand for new drugs.

Authors:  S Hensley
Journal:  Mod Healthc       Date:  1999-08-23

Review 3.  Just what the HMO ordered: the paradox of increasing drug costs.

Authors:  J D Kleinke
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2000 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 6.301

4.  A method for the detailed assessment of the appropriateness of medical technologies.

Authors:  R H Brook; M R Chassin; A Fink; D H Solomon; J Kosecoff; R E Park
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  1986       Impact factor: 2.188

5.  The appropriateness of medical services.

Authors:  J Kosecoff; A Fink; M R Chassin; R H Brook
Journal:  Healthspan       Date:  1987-06

6.  Does inappropriate use explain small-area variations in the use of health care services?

Authors:  L L Leape; R E Park; D H Solomon; M R Chassin; J Kosecoff; R H Brook
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  1990-02-02       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  Clinical decision analysis.

Authors:  P P Glasziou; S Schwartz
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  1991-01-21       Impact factor: 7.738

8.  Say a prayer for health care's future.

Authors:  J Leifer
Journal:  Hosp Health Netw       Date:  1998-07-05

Review 9.  Outcomes of pharmacological and surgical treatment for obesity.

Authors:  J Cerulli; M Malone
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-09       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Measuring the clinical appropriateness of the use of a procedure. Can we do it?

Authors:  K L Kahn; J Kosecoff; M R Chassin; M F Flynn; A Fink; N Pattaphongse; D H Solomon; R H Brook
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  1988-04       Impact factor: 2.983

View more
  1 in total

Review 1.  "Medicamentation" of society, non-diseases and non-medications: a point of view from social pharmacology.

Authors:  T B Ngoundo Mbongue; A Sommet; A Pathak; J L Montastruc
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-05-14       Impact factor: 2.953

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.