Literature DB >> 22046102

Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.

Tania Stafinski1, Devidas Menon, Caroline Davis, Christopher McCabe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare centralized reimbursement/coverage decision-making processes for health technologies in 23 European countries, according to: mandate, authority, structure, and policy options; mechanisms for identifying, selecting, and evaluating technologies; clinical and economic evidence expectations; committee composition, procedures, and factors considered; available conditional reimbursement options for promising new technologies; and the manufacturers' roles in the process.
METHODS: A comprehensive review of publicly available information from peer-reviewed literature (using a variety of bibliographic databases) and gray literature (eg, working papers, committee reports, presentations, and government documents) was conducted. Policy experts in each of the 23 countries were also contacted. All information collected was reviewed by two independent researchers.
RESULTS: Most European countries have established centralized reimbursement systems for making decisions on health technologies. However, the scope of technologies considered, as well as processes for identifying, selecting, and reviewing them varies. All systems include an assessment of clinical evidence, compiled in accordance with their own guidelines or internationally recognized published ones. In addition, most systems require an economic evaluation. The quality of such information is typically assessed by content and methodological experts. Committees responsible for formulating recommendations or decisions are multidisciplinary. While criteria used by committees appear transparent, how they are operationalized during deliberations remains unclear. Increasingly, reimbursement systems are expressing interest in and/or implementing reimbursement policy options that extend beyond the traditional "yes," "no," or "yes with restrictions" options. Such options typically require greater involvement of manufacturers which, to date, has been limited.
CONCLUSION: Centralized reimbursement systems have become an important policy tool in many European countries. Nevertheless, there remains a lack of transparency around critical elements, such as how multiple factors or criteria are weighed during committee deliberations.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Europe; centralized review; health technologies; reimbursement

Year:  2011        PMID: 22046102      PMCID: PMC3202480          DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S14407

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clinicoecon Outcomes Res        ISSN: 1178-6981


  64 in total

1.  National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments.

Authors:  Michael D Rawlins; Anthony J Culyer
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2004-07-24

2.  Recent developments in pharmacoeconomic evaluation in Ireland.

Authors:  Lesley Tilson; Michael Barry
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 3.  Pharmaceutical policies in European countries.

Authors:  Pedro Pita Barros
Journal:  Adv Health Econ Health Serv Res       Date:  2010

4.  Use of comparative effectiveness research in drug coverage and pricing decisions: a six-country comparison.

Authors:  Corinna Sorenson
Journal:  Issue Brief (Commonw Fund)       Date:  2010-07

5.  History of health technology assessment in Hungary.

Authors:  László Gulácsi; Valentin Brodszky; Márta Péntek; Szilárd Varga; Gábor Vas; Imre Boncz
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2009-06-08       Impact factor: 2.188

6.  Relative effectiveness assessment of listed drugs (REAL): a new method for an early comparison of the effectiveness of approved health technologies.

Authors:  Bruno Falissard; Valérie Izard; Bertrand Xerri; Gilles Bouvenot; François Meyer; Laurent Degos
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.188

7.  A case study of ex ante, value-based price and reimbursement decision-making: TLV and rimonabant in Sweden.

Authors:  Ulf Persson; Michael Willis; Knut Odegaard
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2009-07-29

Review 8.  Reimbursement agency requirements for health related quality-of-life data: a case study.

Authors:  Andrew Lloyd; Diane Wild; Katy Gallop; Warren Cowell
Journal:  Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res       Date:  2009-12       Impact factor: 2.217

9.  Impact analysis of the discontinuation of reimbursement: the case of oral contraceptives.

Authors:  Pieter Stolk; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Hubert G M Leufkens; Eibert R Heerdink
Journal:  Contraception       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 3.375

Review 10.  Definition of the "health benefit basket" in poland.

Authors:  Adam Kozierkiewicz; Wojciech Trabka; Artur Romaszewski; Krzysztof Gajda; Dariusz Gilewski
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2005-12
View more
  14 in total

1.  Transparency in reimbursement decisions: in whose best interest?

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  The Value of Medicines: A Crucial but Vague Concept.

Authors:  Fernando Antoñanzas; Robert Terkola; Maarten Postma
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Revealed and Stated Preferences of Decision Makers for Priority Setting in Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Peter Ghijben; Yuanyuan Gu; Emily Lancsar; Silva Zavarsek
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2018-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Decision-makers' preferences for approving new medicines in Wales: a discrete-choice experiment with assessment of external validity.

Authors:  Warren G Linley; Dyfrig A Hughes
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Stakeholder opinions on value in healthcare.

Authors:  Robert Terkola; Fernando Antoñanzas; Maarten Postma
Journal:  Eur J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2017-10-25

Review 6.  A systematic review of moral reasons on orphan drug reimbursement.

Authors:  Bettina M Zimmermann; Johanna Eichinger; Matthias R Baumgartner
Journal:  Orphanet J Rare Dis       Date:  2021-06-30       Impact factor: 4.123

7.  Value-based reimbursement decisions for orphan drugs: a scoping review and decision framework.

Authors:  Mike Paulden; Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Christopher McCabe
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-03       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  The use of research evidence on patient preferences in pharmaceutical coverage decisions and clinical practice guideline development: exploratory study into current state of play and potential barriers.

Authors:  Cecile M A Utens; Trudy van der Weijden; Manuela A Joore; Carmen D Dirksen
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2014-11-11       Impact factor: 2.655

9.  Decision-making in healthcare: a practical application of partial least square path modelling to coverage of newborn screening programmes.

Authors:  Katharina E Fischer
Journal:  BMC Med Inform Decis Mak       Date:  2012-08-02       Impact factor: 2.796

10.  From market access to patient access: overview of evidence-based approaches for the reimbursement and pricing of pharmaceuticals in 36 European countries.

Authors:  Dimitra Panteli; Helene Eckhardt; Alexandra Nolting; Reinhard Busse; Michael Kulig
Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst       Date:  2015-09-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.