Eman A Hammad1. 1. Department of Biopharmaceutics and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmacy, University of Jordan, Amman, Jordan. Electronic address: e.hammad@ju.edu.jo.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Drug pricing is an example of a priority setting in a developing country with official requirements for the use of cost-effectiveness (CE) evidence. OBJECTIVE: To describe the role of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan. METHODS: A prospective review of all applications submitted between November 2013 and May 2015 to the Jordan Food and Drug Association's drug pricing committee was carried out. All applications that involved requests for CE evidence were reviewed. Details on the type of study, the extent, and whether the evidence submitted was part of the formal deliberations were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: The committee reviewed a total of 1608 drug pricing applications over the period of the study. CE evidence was requested in only 11 applications. The submitted evidence was of limited use to the committee due to concerns about quality, relevance of studies, and lack of pharmacoeconomic expertise. There were also no clear rules describing how CE would inform pricing decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Limited local data and health economic experience were the main barriers to the use of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan. In addition, there are no official rules describing the elements and process by which the CE evidence would inform drug pricing decisions. This study summarized accumulated observations for the current use of economic evaluations and evidence-based decision making in Jordan. Recommendations have been proposed to applicants and key decision makers to enhance the role of economic evidence in influencing health policies and evidence-based decision making across priority settings.
BACKGROUND: Drug pricing is an example of a priority setting in a developing country with official requirements for the use of cost-effectiveness (CE) evidence. OBJECTIVE: To describe the role of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan. METHODS: A prospective review of all applications submitted between November 2013 and May 2015 to the Jordan Food and Drug Association's drug pricing committee was carried out. All applications that involved requests for CE evidence were reviewed. Details on the type of study, the extent, and whether the evidence submitted was part of the formal deliberations were extracted and summarized. RESULTS: The committee reviewed a total of 1608 drug pricing applications over the period of the study. CE evidence was requested in only 11 applications. The submitted evidence was of limited use to the committee due to concerns about quality, relevance of studies, and lack of pharmacoeconomic expertise. There were also no clear rules describing how CE would inform pricing decisions. CONCLUSIONS: Limited local data and health economic experience were the main barriers to the use of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan. In addition, there are no official rules describing the elements and process by which the CE evidence would inform drug pricing decisions. This study summarized accumulated observations for the current use of economic evaluations and evidence-based decision making in Jordan. Recommendations have been proposed to applicants and key decision makers to enhance the role of economic evidence in influencing health policies and evidence-based decision making across priority settings.
Authors: Eman A Hammad; Ibrahim Alabbadi; Fardos Taissir; Malek Hajjwi; Nathir M Obeidat; Qais Alefan; Rimal Mousa Journal: Health Econ Rev Date: 2022-02-05