• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

将药品自付费用与治疗价值证据挂钩能否改善健康结果并控制医疗成本?

[Can linking co-payment for drugs to evidence on treatment value improve health outcomes and contain healthcare costs?].

作者信息

Triki Noa, Pliskin Joseph S, Greenberg Dan

机构信息

Department of Health Systems Management, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

出版信息

Harefuah. 2010 Aug;149(8):524-8, 550.

PMID:21341433
Abstract

Co-payment strategies are frequently used by health insurers as a measure of containing healthcare costs. However, co-payments may reduce the use of essential drugs in chronically-ill patients. Recently, value-based insurance designs, where co-payments rates are determined by the value of the treatment, have been introduced in the United States. This review summarizes the results of recent studies in the United States, suggesting that reducing co-payments for highly valued treatments and raising co-payments for less effective treatments can lead to better compliance and better outcomes, with the potential of reducing long-term costs. Further research is needed to examine the feasibility of this approach and the long-term impact on quality of care and treatment costs in other healthcare systems, including Israel.

摘要

共付策略经常被健康保险公司用作控制医疗成本的一种措施。然而,共付可能会减少慢性病患者基本药物的使用。最近,美国引入了基于价值的保险设计,即共付率由治疗价值决定。这篇综述总结了美国近期研究的结果,表明降低高价值治疗的共付额,提高低效治疗的共付额,可能会带来更好的依从性和更好的治疗效果,同时有可能降低长期成本。还需要进一步研究来检验这种方法在包括以色列在内的其他医疗系统中的可行性,以及对医疗质量和治疗成本的长期影响。

相似文献

1
[Can linking co-payment for drugs to evidence on treatment value improve health outcomes and contain healthcare costs?].将药品自付费用与治疗价值证据挂钩能否改善健康结果并控制医疗成本?
Harefuah. 2010 Aug;149(8):524-8, 550.
2
Impact of cost sharing on prescription drugs used by Medicare beneficiaries.医疗保险受益人的处方药费用分担的影响。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2010 Jun;6(2):100-9. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2010.03.003. Epub 2010 May 7.
3
A comparison of mail-service and retail community pharmacy claims in 5 prescription benefit plans.5种处方福利计划中邮购服务药房与零售社区药房索赔情况的比较。
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2009 Jun;5(2):133-42. doi: 10.1016/j.sapharm.2008.06.002. Epub 2009 Jan 31.
4
The impact of co-payment increases on dispensings of government-subsidised medicines in Australia.澳大利亚自付费用增加对政府补贴药品配药的影响。
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2008 Nov;17(11):1091-9. doi: 10.1002/pds.1670.
5
Insurers lower cost-sharing for preventive drugs. Aetna, Wellpoint, Humana cut patients' costs to improve compliance, outcomes.保险公司降低预防性药物的费用分摊。安泰、韦尔普oint、哈门那降低患者费用以提高依从性和治疗效果。 (注:Wellpoint常见的中文名称是“韦尔普oint” ,可能是某个特定的品牌或机构名称,具体翻译可根据实际情况调整 )
Mod Healthc. 2013 Oct 14;43(41):14-5.
6
Consumers face higher costs as health plans seek to control drug spending.随着医疗保健计划试图控制药品支出,消费者面临着更高的成本。
Issue Brief Cent Stud Health Syst Change. 2001 Nov(45):1-4.
7
Continental Divide? The attitudes of US and Canadian oncologists on the costs, cost-effectiveness, and health policies associated with new cancer drugs.大陆分水岭?美国和加拿大肿瘤学家对新癌症药物相关成本、成本效益和卫生政策的态度。
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Sep 20;28(27):4149-53. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.29.1625. Epub 2010 Aug 9.
8
Value-based insurance design: embracing value over cost alone.基于价值的保险设计:不仅仅关注成本,更要关注价值。
Am J Manag Care. 2009 Dec;15(10 Suppl):S277-83.
9
Prescription drug co-payments and cost-related medication underuse.处方药自付费用与因费用相关的药物使用不足
Health Econ Policy Law. 2008 Jan;3(Pt 1):51-67. doi: 10.1017/S1744133107004380.
10
A benefit-based copay for prescription drugs: patient contribution based on total benefits, not drug acquisition cost.基于效益的处方药自付费用:患者贡献基于总效益,而非药品采购成本。
Am J Manag Care. 2001 Sep;7(9):861-7.