Suppr超能文献

药品风险分担安排:对欧洲支付方的潜在考虑和建议。

Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers.

机构信息

Ministry of Health, Warsaw, Poland.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Jun 7;10:153. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-153.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There has been an increase in 'risk sharing' schemes for pharmaceuticals between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies in Europe in recent years as an additional approach to provide continued comprehensive and equitable healthcare. There is though confusion surrounding the terminology as well as concerns with existing schemes.

METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to identify existing schemes supplemented with additional internal documents or web-based references known to the authors. This was combined with the extensive knowledge of health authority personnel from 14 different countries and locations involved with these schemes.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A large number of 'risk sharing' schemes with pharmaceuticals are in existence incorporating both financial-based models and performance-based/outcomes-based models. In view of this, a new logical definition is proposed. This is "risk sharing' schemes should be considered as agreements concluded by payers and pharmaceutical companies to diminish the impact on payers' budgets for new and existing schemes brought about by uncertainty and/or the need to work within finite budgets". There are a number of concerns with existing schemes. These include potentially high administration costs, lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether health authorities will end up funding an appreciable proportion of a new drug's development costs. In addition, there is a paucity of published evaluations of existing schemes with pharmaceuticals.

CONCLUSION

We believe there are only a limited number of situations where 'risk sharing' schemes should be considered as well as factors that should be considered by payers in advance of implementation. This includes their objective, appropriateness, the availability of competent staff to fully evaluate proposed schemes as well as access to IT support. This also includes whether systematic evaluations have been built into proposed schemes.

摘要

背景

近年来,欧洲医疗机构与制药公司之间增加了药品“风险共担”计划,作为提供持续全面和公平医疗保健的另一种方法。然而,术语的使用存在混淆,对现有计划也存在担忧。

方法

我们进行了文献回顾,以确定现有的计划,并辅以作者已知的其他内部文件或基于网络的参考资料。这与来自 14 个不同国家和地区的卫生当局人员的广泛知识相结合,这些人员参与了这些计划。

结果和讨论

存在大量药品“风险共担”计划,包括基于财务的模型和基于绩效/结果的模型。有鉴于此,我们提出了一个新的逻辑定义。这一定义为:“风险共担”计划应被视为付款人和制药公司之间达成的协议,以减轻新计划和现有计划给付款人预算带来的不确定性和/或在有限预算内工作的影响。现有计划存在一些问题。这些问题包括潜在的高管理成本、缺乏透明度、利益冲突,以及卫生当局最终是否会为新药开发成本的相当一部分提供资金。此外,关于现有药品“风险共担”计划的评价很少。

结论

我们认为,只有在有限的情况下才应考虑“风险共担”计划,并且付款人在实施前应考虑一些因素,包括其目标、适当性、是否有能力全面评估拟议计划的人员以及获得 IT 支持的情况。这还包括是否在拟议计划中建立了系统评价。

相似文献

2
[Risk sharing methods in middle income countries].
Acta Pharm Hung. 2012;82(1):43-52.
4
Risk-sharing arrangements that link payment for drugs to health outcomes are proving hard to implement.
Health Aff (Millwood). 2011 Dec;30(12):2329-37. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2010.1147.
6
Examining Misaligned Incentives for Payers and Manufacturers in Value-Based Pharmaceutical Contracts.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2020 Jan;26(1):63-66. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2020.26.1.63.
7
Risk sharing or risk shifting? On the development of patient access schemes in the process of updating the national list of health services in Israel.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2019 Dec;19(6):749-753. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2019.1702525. Epub 2019 Dec 11.
8
When are Pharmaceuticals Priced Fairly? An Alternative Risk-Sharing Model for Pharmaceutical Pricing.
Health Care Anal. 2020 Jun;28(2):121-136. doi: 10.1007/s10728-020-00394-x.
10
Pharmaceutical risk-sharing agreements.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(7):551-6. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200826070-00002.

引用本文的文献

1
Innovative Payment Mechanisms for High-Cost Medical Devices in Latin America: Experience in Designing Outcome Protection Programs in the Region.
J Mark Access Health Policy. 2025 Aug 4;13(3):39. doi: 10.3390/jmahp13030039. eCollection 2025 Sep.
2
Public perceptions of high-cost cancer drugs and the implications for reimbursement decisions.
Health Econ Rev. 2025 Jul 12;15(1):61. doi: 10.1186/s13561-025-00659-y.
3
What did the scientific literature learn from internal company documents in the pharmaceutical industry? A scoping review.
Cochrane Evid Synth Methods. 2023 Apr 27;1(3):e12011. doi: 10.1002/cesm.12011. eCollection 2023 May.
5
Risk-based pricing models and the role they might play in patients' access to new stem cell therapies.
Regen Med. 2024 Dec;19(12):589-593. doi: 10.1080/17460751.2024.2441642. Epub 2024 Dec 18.
6
The national budget impact of managed entry agreement strategies match with high-cost drugs to maximise drug cost saving: a study protocol.
J Pharm Policy Pract. 2024 Dec 3;17(1):2428395. doi: 10.1080/20523211.2024.2428395. eCollection 2024.
8
Timely, Cheap, or Risk-Free? The Effect of Regulation on the Price and Availability of New Drugs.
Pharmacy (Basel). 2024 Mar 18;12(2):50. doi: 10.3390/pharmacy12020050.
9
Navigating Gene Therapy Access: The Case of Bulgaria in the Context of the EU Regulatory Landscape.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Feb 11;12(4):458. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12040458.
10
Revitalizing oncology medications access in Saudi Arabia: Current challenges and recommendations by the Saudi Oncology Pharmacy Assembly.
J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2025 Mar;31(2):245-250. doi: 10.1177/10781552241232697. Epub 2024 Feb 20.

本文引用的文献

2
Insight into recent reforms and initiatives in Austria: implications for key stakeholders.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2008 Aug;8(4):357-71. doi: 10.1586/14737167.8.4.357.
3
Fair pricing for medicines in the UK.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2007 Jun;7(3):207-9. doi: 10.1586/14737167.7.3.207.
4
Patient access schemes for high-cost cancer medicines.
Lancet Oncol. 2010 Feb;11(2):111-2. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70402-4.
5
Access with evidence development in the UK: past experience, current initiatives and future potential.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):163-70. doi: 10.2165/11531410-000000000-00000.
6
Access with evidence development: the US experience.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):153-62. doi: 10.2165/11531050-000000000-00000.
7
Access with evidence development schemes: a framework for description and evaluation.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):143-52. doi: 10.2165/11530850-000000000-00000.
10
Ongoing pharmaceutical reforms in France: implications for key stakeholder groups.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2010;8(1):7-24. doi: 10.1007/BF03256162.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验