EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

Views and opinions of the general public about the reimbursement of expensive medicines in the Netherlands

Féline E V Scheijmans, Roosmarijn van der Wal, Margot L Zomers, Johannes J M van Delden, W Ludo van der Pol and Ghislaine J M W van Thiel

PLOS ONE, 2025, vol. 20, issue 1, 1-17

Abstract: Objectives: Solidarity-based healthcare systems are being challenged by the incremental costs of new and expensive medicines for cancer and rare diseases. To regulate reimbursement of such drugs, the Dutch government introduced a policy instrument known as the Coverage Lock (CL) in 2015. Little is known about the public opinion regarding such policy instruments and their consequences, i.e., reimbursement of some, but not all, expensive medicines. We aimed to identify the preferences of Dutch citizens regarding the reimbursement of expensive medicines, and to investigate the views of the public on the use of the CL as a healthcare policy instrument and their input for improvement. Methods: Web-based survey of a representative sample of 1999 Dutch citizens aged 18 years and older (panel of research company Kantar Public). Potential respondents were approached via e-mail. Several policy measures, real-life cases and statements related to the CL were presented in the survey to respondents. Their responses were analysed by tabulating descriptive statistics (proportions and percentages). Results: 1179 individuals (response rate 59%) filled in the questionnaire. Although a majority considered the CL policy unjustified, they preferred it to the alternative policy measures that were presented. In four real-life case descriptions of patients in need of expensive medicines, respondents most often indicated effectiveness, lack of availability of alternative treatment and improved quality of life due to treatment as reasons for a positive reimbursement decision. An unfavourable cost-benefit ratio was their main reason to be against reimbursement. Some argued that withholding reimbursement was a way of informing manufacturers that extremely high prices are unacceptable. Conclusion: There is public support for patients in need of expensive medicine. Many respondents supported the CL as a reimbursement policy. However, there is a wish to optimize the interpretation of the assessment criteria and the weight these are attributed in decision making about reimbursement of expensive innovative medicine for patients.

Date: 2025
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0317188 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 17188&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0317188

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0317188

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().

 
Page updated 2025-05-10
Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0317188