A Review of Current Approaches to Evaluating and Reimbursing New Medicines in a Subset of OECD Countries

Néboa Zozaya (), Javier Villaseca, Irene Fernández, Fernando Abdalla, Benito Cadenas-Noreña, Miguel Ángel Calleja, Pedro Gómez-Pajuelo, Jorge Mestre-Ferrándiz, Juan Oliva-Moreno, José Luis Trillo and Álvaro Hidalgo-Vega
Additional contact information
Néboa Zozaya: Weber
Javier Villaseca: Weber
Irene Fernández: Weber
Fernando Abdalla: Weber
Benito Cadenas-Noreña: King Juan Carlos University & Syracuse University
Miguel Ángel Calleja: Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena
Pedro Gómez-Pajuelo: Ministry of Health
Jorge Mestre-Ferrándiz: Independent Economics Consultant
Juan Oliva-Moreno: University of Castilla-La Mancha
José Luis Trillo: Health Area of the Malvarrosa Valencia Clinical Department
Álvaro Hidalgo-Vega: University of Castilla-La Mancha

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, 2024, vol. 22, issue 3, No 3, 297-313

Abstract: Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to review the current evaluation and funding processes for new drugs in different developed countries, to provide a comparative framework with detailed, homogeneous, and up-to-date information. Methods Scientific publications, reports and websites were reviewed between July and December 2021 using PubMed, Google Scholar, and grey literature sources. The main items searched were actors and processes, including timelines, characteristics of clinical and economic evaluations, participation of stakeholders, elements of price and reimbursement decisions, cost-effectiveness thresholds and specific funds. The analysed 13 countries were Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Portugal, Scotland, South Korea, Spain and Sweden. Results Eight countries perform the assessment process separated from the pricing decision. Countries measure each drug’s added therapeutic value through multi-attribute value scales, algorithms, non-prescriptive lists of criteria, or quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Health technology assessment (HTA) methodologies differ in their outcome measures, elicitation techniques, comparators, and perspectives. The criteria used for pricing and reimbursement include humanistic, clinical, and economic aspects. Only Scotland, England, the Netherlands, Canada and Portugal use explicit efficiency thresholds. Health care professionals participate in all assessment committees, and patients are becoming increasingly involved in most countries. The official time from marketing authorisation to the completion of the evaluation and pricing processes varied from 126 to 540 days. Conclusions Most analysed countries show a trend towards value-based approaches that consider value for money to society, but also other economic, clinical, and humanistic criteria. Good practices included robustness, transparency, independence, and participation.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-023-00867-9 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

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:spr:aphecp:v:22:y:2024:i:3:d:10.1007_s40258-023-00867-9

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40258

DOI: 10.1007/s40258-023-00867-9

Access Statistics for this article

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson

More articles in Applied Health Economics and Health Policy from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().