Linda Yamoah1,2, Nick Dragojlovic3, Alesha Smith2, Larry D Lynd4, Carlo A Marra5. 1. Pharmacy Intern, Wellington, New Zealand. 2. School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. 3. Collaboration for Research and Evaluation (CORE), Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 4. Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. 5. School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, 9054, New Zealand. Carlo.marra@otago.ac.nz.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: New Zealand's near static healthcare budget limits access to expensive medications including those for rare conditions. As such, it is necessary to know the public's priority for values in the drug funding decision-making process. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to measure the relative societal importance of values of New Zealanders in informing drug funding decisions and to determine how New Zealanders trade off funding in various scenarios between common and rare diseases. METHODS: An online survey was conducted between 17 April and 17 May, 2019 on a sample of 500 New Zealanders aged ≥ 18 years. Participants ranked 13 values using an analytical hierarchy process. Participants were then presented with different trade-off scenarios to measure their attitudes towards funding drugs for common and rare diseases. RESULTS: The values ranked in the top five by most were potential effect on quality of life (71.8%), ability of the drug to work (57.6%), severity (57.6%), safety (57%), and potential to extend life (56%). Adherence and rarity held the lowest and second lowest ranking. Most believe that resources should be allocated towards drugs that have been proven to work and have the greatest health benefits. In trade-offs between access to an expensive drug therapy for a rare disease with uncertain benefits or receive a fixed cash payment, the overwhelming consensus was to receive the cash payment. CONCLUSIONS: New Zealanders ultimately value drug-related factors (e.g. quality of life and efficacy) and disease-related factors (e.g. severity of disease and equity) the most but did not value disease rarity.
BACKGROUND: New Zealand's near static healthcare budget limits access to expensive medications including those for rare conditions. As such, it is necessary to know the public's priority for values in the drug funding decision-making process. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to measure the relative societal importance of values of New Zealanders in informing drug funding decisions and to determine how New Zealanders trade off funding in various scenarios between common and rare diseases. METHODS: An online survey was conducted between 17 April and 17 May, 2019 on a sample of 500 New Zealanders aged ≥ 18 years. Participants ranked 13 values using an analytical hierarchy process. Participants were then presented with different trade-off scenarios to measure their attitudes towards funding drugs for common and rare diseases. RESULTS: The values ranked in the top five by most were potential effect on quality of life (71.8%), ability of the drug to work (57.6%), severity (57.6%), safety (57%), and potential to extend life (56%). Adherence and rarity held the lowest and second lowest ranking. Most believe that resources should be allocated towards drugs that have been proven to work and have the greatest health benefits. In trade-offs between access to an expensive drug therapy for a rare disease with uncertain benefits or receive a fixed cash payment, the overwhelming consensus was to receive the cash payment. CONCLUSIONS: New Zealanders ultimately value drug-related factors (e.g. quality of life and efficacy) and disease-related factors (e.g. severity of disease and equity) the most but did not value disease rarity.