OBJECTIVE: To provide a comparison of national drug reimbursement decision-making, including an update of economic evaluation roles and barriers, in Thailand, China, and South Korea. METHODS: Documentary reviews supplemented by experiences of policymakers. RESULTS: National health insurance policy in all the three countries has been developed toward coverage for all. It leads to higher health-care expenditures and requires a good reimbursement system for health-care services, including drugs. Drug reimbursement decision-making in these countries is to develop a reimbursement list with the help of various committees having different roles. Primarily, they assess the clinical and safety evidence. Economic evidence, including budget impact and pharmacoeconomic evaluation, has also been very important for their reimbursement decision-making. This evidence is sometimes used in negotiation mechanism, which allows pharmaceutical companies to lower their drug prices and leads to lower overall drug expenditures. Several common barriers, for example, human capacity and data availability, for obtaining economic evidence in all the three countries, however, still exist. CONCLUSIONS: Drug reimbursement decision-making in Thailand, China, and South Korea is in its transition period. It seems to run in the same direction, for example, guideline development and pharmacoeconomic evaluation agency establishment. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation plays important roles in the efficiency of drug reimbursement decision-making, even though there are several barriers to be overcome.
OBJECTIVE: To provide a comparison of national drug reimbursement decision-making, including an update of economic evaluation roles and barriers, in Thailand, China, and South Korea. METHODS: Documentary reviews supplemented by experiences of policymakers. RESULTS: National health insurance policy in all the three countries has been developed toward coverage for all. It leads to higher health-care expenditures and requires a good reimbursement system for health-care services, including drugs. Drug reimbursement decision-making in these countries is to develop a reimbursement list with the help of various committees having different roles. Primarily, they assess the clinical and safety evidence. Economic evidence, including budget impact and pharmacoeconomic evaluation, has also been very important for their reimbursement decision-making. This evidence is sometimes used in negotiation mechanism, which allows pharmaceutical companies to lower their drug prices and leads to lower overall drug expenditures. Several common barriers, for example, human capacity and data availability, for obtaining economic evidence in all the three countries, however, still exist. CONCLUSIONS: Drug reimbursement decision-making in Thailand, China, and South Korea is in its transition period. It seems to run in the same direction, for example, guideline development and pharmacoeconomic evaluation agency establishment. Pharmacoeconomic evaluation plays important roles in the efficiency of drug reimbursement decision-making, even though there are several barriers to be overcome.