Literature DB >> 29478116

The Australian Managed Entry Scheme: Are We Getting it Right?

Haitham W Tuffaha1,2, Paul A Scuffham3,4.   

Abstract

In 2010, the Australian Government introduced the managed entry scheme (MES) to improve patient access to subsidised drugs on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme and enhance the quality of evidence provided to decision makers. The aim of this paper was to critically review the Australian MES experience. We performed a comprehensive review of publicly available Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee online documents from January 2010 to July 2017. Relevant information on each MES agreement was systematically extracted, including its rationale, the conditions that guided its implementation and its policy outcomes. We identified 11 drugs where an MES was considered. Most of the identified drugs (75%) were antineoplastic agents and the main uncertainty was the overall survival benefit. More than half of the MES proposals were made by sponsors and most of the schemes were considered after previous rejected/deferred submissions for reimbursement. An MES was not established in 8 of 11 drugs (73%) despite the high evidence uncertainty. Nevertheless, six of these eight drugs were listed after the sponsors reduced their prices. Three MESs were established and implemented by Deeds of Agreement. The three cases were concluded and the required data were submitted within the agreed time frames. The need for feasibility and value of an MES should be carefully considered by stakeholders before embarking on such an agreement. It is essential to engage major stakeholders, including patient representatives, in this process. The conditions governing MESs should be clear, transparent and balanced to address the expectations of various stakeholders.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29478116     DOI: 10.1007/s40273-018-0633-6

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


  21 in total

1.  Pooled Analysis of Long-Term Survival Data From Phase II and Phase III Trials of Ipilimumab in Unresectable or Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Dirk Schadendorf; F Stephen Hodi; Caroline Robert; Jeffrey S Weber; Kim Margolin; Omid Hamid; Debra Patt; Tai-Tsang Chen; David M Berman; Jedd D Wolchok
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2015-02-09       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues.

Authors:  John Hutton; Paul Trueman; Christopher Henshall
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Coverage with Evidence Development: applications and issues.

Authors:  Paul Trueman; David L Grainger; Kristen E Downs
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.188

Review 4.  Linking payment to health outcomes: a taxonomy and examination of performance-based reimbursement schemes between healthcare payers and manufacturers.

Authors:  Josh J Carlson; Sean D Sullivan; Louis P Garrison; Peter J Neumann; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2010-03-11       Impact factor: 2.980

5.  Setting Medical Research Future Fund priorities: assessing the value of research.

Authors:  Haitham W Tuffaha; Lazaros Andronis; Paul A Scuffham
Journal:  Med J Aust       Date:  2017-02-06       Impact factor: 7.738

6.  Sharing risk between payer and provider by leasing health technologies: an affordable and effective reimbursement strategy for innovative technologies?

Authors:  Richard Edlin; Peter Hall; Klemens Wallner; Christopher McCabe
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 5.725

7.  A Comprehensive Algorithm for Approval of Health Technologies With, Without, or Only in Research: The Key Principles for Informing Coverage Decisions.

Authors:  Karl Claxton; Stephen Palmer; Louise Longworth; Laura Bojke; Susan Griffin; Marta Soares; Eldon Spackman; Claire Rothery
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2016-05-11       Impact factor: 5.725

8.  The HTA Risk Analysis Chart: Visualising the Need for and Potential Value of Managed Entry Agreements in Health Technology Assessment.

Authors:  Sabine Elisabeth Grimm; Mark Strong; Alan Brennan; Allan J Wailoo
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  The Implementation of Managed Entry Agreements in Central and Eastern Europe: Findings and Implications.

Authors:  Alessandra Ferrario; Diāna Arāja; Tomasz Bochenek; Tarik Čatić; Dávid Dankó; Maria Dimitrova; Jurij Fürst; Ieva Greičiūtė-Kuprijanov; Iris Hoxha; Arianit Jakupi; Erki Laidmäe; Olga Löblová; Ileana Mardare; Vanda Markovic-Pekovic; Dmitry Meshkov; Tanja Novakovic; Guenka Petrova; Maciej Pomorski; Dominik Tomek; Luka Voncina; Alan Haycox; Panos Kanavos; Patricia Vella Bonanno; Brian Godman
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  Politics and its intersection with coverage with evidence development: a qualitative analysis from expert interviews.

Authors:  Danielle Bishop; Joel Lexchin
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2013-03-09       Impact factor: 2.655

View more
  2 in total

1.  Healthcare Funding Decisions and Real-World Benefits: Reducing Bias by Matching Untreated Patients.

Authors:  Peter Ghijben; Dennis Petrie; Silva Zavarsek; Gang Chen; Emily Lancsar
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2021-04-09       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Impact of a New Cost-Effectiveness Threshold Implementation on Cancer Formulary Decisions in Jordan.

Authors:  Imad Treish; Abeer Al Rabayah; Saad Jaddoua; Haitham Tuffaha
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2021-11-13
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.