• 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

澳大利亚药品的财务影响与覆盖范围之间的关系。

Relationship between financial impact and coverage of drugs in Australia.

机构信息

RTI Health Solutions, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.

出版信息

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Jan;29(1):92-100. doi: 10.1017/S0266462312000724. Epub 2012 Dec 10.

DOI:10.1017/S0266462312000724
PMID:23217275
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3582189/
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to estimate the relationship between the financial impact of a new drug and the recommendation for reimbursement by the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC).

METHODS

Data in the PBAC summary database were abstracted for decisions made between July 2005 and November 2009. Financial impact-the upper bound of the values presented in the PBAC summary database-was categorized as ≤A$0, >A$0 up to A$10 million, A$10 million up to A$30 million, and >A$30 million per year. Descriptive, logistic, survival, and recursive partitioning decision analyses were used to estimate the relationship between the financial impact of a new drug indication and the recommendation for reimbursement. Multivariable analyses controlled for other clinical and economic variables, including cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained.

RESULTS

Financial impact was a significant predictor of the recommendation for reimbursement. In the logistic analysis, the odds ratios of reimbursement for drug submissions with financial impacts ≥A$10 million to ≥A$30 million or >A$0 to <A$10 million compared with ≤A$0 were 0.12 (95 percent confidence interval [CI]: 0.03-0.51) and 0.16 (95 percent CI: 0.04-0.60), respectively. In the recursive partition decision analysis, the first split of the data was for submissions with a positive financial impact compared with those with a zero or negative financial impact.

CONCLUSIONS

In Australia, financial impact on the drug budget is an important determinant of whether a new drug is recommended for reimbursement when cost-effectiveness estimates and other clinical and economic variables are controlled.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估新药对药物预算的财务影响与澳大利亚药品福利咨询委员会(PBAC)建议报销之间的关系。

方法

从 2005 年 7 月至 2009 年 11 月 PBAC 总结数据库中提取决策数据。财务影响——PBAC 总结数据库中呈现的数值上限——分为≤澳元 0 元、>澳元 0 元至 1000 万澳元、>澳元 1000 万至 3000 万澳元以及>澳元 3000 万澳元/年。采用描述性、逻辑、生存和递归分区决策分析来估计新药适应证的财务影响与报销建议之间的关系。多变量分析控制了其他临床和经济变量,包括每获得一个质量调整生命年的成本。

结果

财务影响是报销建议的重要预测指标。在逻辑分析中,与澳元 0 元相比,财务影响≥澳元 1000 万至≥澳元 3000 万或≥澳元 0 元至<澳元 1000 万的药物申请报销的比值比分别为 0.12(95%置信区间:0.03-0.51)和 0.16(95%置信区间:0.04-0.60)。在递归分区决策分析中,数据的第一次分割是针对财务影响为正的申请与财务影响为零或负的申请。

结论

在澳大利亚,当控制成本效益估计和其他临床及经济变量时,药物预算的财务影响是决定新药物是否被推荐报销的一个重要因素。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/ede3cc47904c/S0266462312000724_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/29e49d7e5b98/S0266462312000724_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/b435eafe30bb/S0266462312000724_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/ede3cc47904c/S0266462312000724_fig3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/29e49d7e5b98/S0266462312000724_fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/b435eafe30bb/S0266462312000724_fig2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ae00/3582189/ede3cc47904c/S0266462312000724_fig3.jpg

相似文献

1
Relationship between financial impact and coverage of drugs in Australia.澳大利亚药品的财务影响与覆盖范围之间的关系。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Jan;29(1):92-100. doi: 10.1017/S0266462312000724. Epub 2012 Dec 10.
2
Are cancer drugs less likely to be recommended for listing by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia?在澳大利亚,癌症药物被药品福利咨询委员会推荐列入医保目录的可能性是否更低?
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(6):463-75. doi: 10.2165/11533000-000000000-00000.
3
PHARMACEUTICAL BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS IN AUSTRALIA.澳大利亚药品福利咨询委员会的建议。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(4):521-528. doi: 10.1017/S0266462317000617. Epub 2017 Jul 13.
4
Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada.利用有效性和成本效益来做出药物覆盖范围决策:英国、澳大利亚和加拿大的比较
JAMA. 2009 Oct 7;302(13):1437-43. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1409.
5
Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in australia (1991 to 1996).成本效益分析与决策的一致性:来自澳大利亚药品报销的证据(1991年至1996年)
Pharmacoeconomics. 2001;19(11):1103-9. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200119110-00004.
6
The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for drugs in Australia: a retrospective analysis 1994-2004.性价比在澳大利亚药品公共保险覆盖决策中的作用:1994 - 2004年回顾性分析
Med Decis Making. 2008 Sep-Oct;28(5):713-22. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08315247. Epub 2008 Mar 31.
7
Analysis of PBAC submissions and outcomes for medicines (2010-2018).药品 (2010-2018 年) 医保药物评审局受理申请及结果分析。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020 Jun;36(3):224-231. doi: 10.1017/S026646232000029X. Epub 2020 Jun 11.
8
Key considerations in reimbursement decision-making for multiple sclerosis drugs in Australia.在澳大利亚,多发性硬化症药物报销决策中的关键考虑因素。
Mult Scler Relat Disord. 2018 Oct;25:144-149. doi: 10.1016/j.msard.2018.07.020. Epub 2018 Aug 1.
9
Assessment of the Quality of the Clinical Evidence in Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee: Fit for Purpose?提交给澳大利亚药品福利咨询委员会的材料中临床证据质量的评估:是否符合目的?
Value Health. 2015 Jun;18(4):467-76. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2015.02.011. Epub 2015 Apr 11.
10
Factors associated with Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee decisions for listing medicines for diabetes and its associated complications.与药物福利咨询委员会关于糖尿病及其相关并发症药物上市决策相关的因素。
Aust Health Rev. 2023 Apr;47(2):139-147. doi: 10.1071/AH22198.

引用本文的文献

1
Methods and Practical Considerations for Conducting Budget Impact Analysis for Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions.开展非药物干预预算影响分析的方法与实际考量
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2025 Mar;23(2):197-208. doi: 10.1007/s40258-024-00943-8. Epub 2025 Jan 16.
2
Unravelling the Association Between Uncertainties in Model-based Economic Analysis and Funding Recommendations of Medicines in Australia.解析基于模型的经济分析中的不确定性与澳大利亚药品资助建议之间的关联。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Mar;43(3):283-296. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01446-z. Epub 2024 Nov 15.
3
Bring Out Your Dead: A Review of the Cost Minimisation Approach in Health Technology Assessment Submissions to the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee.

本文引用的文献

1
Recursive partitioning analysis of prognostic factors for glioblastoma patients aged 70 years or older.70 岁及以上胶质母细胞瘤患者预后因素的递归分区分析。
Cancer. 2012 Nov 15;118(22):5595-600. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27570. Epub 2012 Apr 19.
2
Are cancer drugs less likely to be recommended for listing by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee in Australia?在澳大利亚,癌症药物被药品福利咨询委员会推荐列入医保目录的可能性是否更低?
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(6):463-75. doi: 10.2165/11533000-000000000-00000.
3
An introduction to recursive partitioning: rationale, application, and characteristics of classification and regression trees, bagging, and random forests.
《唤醒死者:对澳大利亚药品福利咨询委员会健康技术评估提交物中成本最小化方法的评价》
Pharmacoeconomics. 2024 Nov;42(11):1287-1300. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01420-9. Epub 2024 Aug 24.
4
Direct-Acting Antivirals Remain Cost-Effective Treatments for Chronic Hepatitis C in Australia Despite Changes to the Treated Population and the Availability of Retreatment: The Glecaprevir/Pibrentasvir (Maviret) Example.尽管接受治疗的人群发生了变化且有再次治疗的机会,但在澳大利亚,直接作用抗病毒药物仍是慢性丙型肝炎的经济有效治疗方法:以格卡瑞韦/哌仑他韦(玛巴洛沙韦)为例。
Infect Dis Ther. 2024 Mar;13(3):549-564. doi: 10.1007/s40121-024-00926-1. Epub 2024 Mar 1.
5
The role of budget impact and its relationship with cost-effectiveness in reimbursement decisions on health technologies in the Netherlands.荷兰卫生技术报销决策中预算影响及其与成本效益的关系。
Eur J Health Econ. 2024 Nov;25(8):1449-1459. doi: 10.1007/s10198-024-01673-3. Epub 2024 Feb 27.
6
Assessing the Accuracy of Sales Forecasts Submitted by Pharmaceutical Companies Applying for Reimbursement in Austria.评估申请奥地利报销的制药公司提交的销售预测的准确性。
Front Pharmacol. 2021 Aug 13;12:726758. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2021.726758. eCollection 2021.
7
Empirical Monetary Valuation of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: A Willingness-to-Pay Analysis.沙特阿拉伯王国质量调整生命年的实证货币估值:支付意愿分析。
Pharmacoecon Open. 2020 Dec;4(4):625-633. doi: 10.1007/s41669-020-00211-0.
8
Accuracy of budget impact estimations and impact on patient access: a hepatitis C case study.预算影响估计的准确性及其对患者可及性的影响:丙型肝炎案例研究。
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Aug;20(6):857-867. doi: 10.1007/s10198-019-01048-z. Epub 2019 Apr 5.
9
A methodological review of national and transnational pharmaceutical budget impact analysis guidelines for new drug submissions.关于新药申报的国家和跨国药品预算影响分析指南的方法学综述。
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Nov 26;10:821-854. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S178825. eCollection 2018.
10
The French National Authority for Health (HAS) Guidelines for Conducting Budget Impact Analyses (BIA).法国国家卫生局(HAS)预算影响分析(BIA)指南。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Apr;36(4):407-417. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0602-5.
递归分区介绍:分类和回归树、装袋和随机森林的原理、应用和特点。
Psychol Methods. 2009 Dec;14(4):323-48. doi: 10.1037/a0016973.
4
Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada.利用有效性和成本效益来做出药物覆盖范围决策:英国、澳大利亚和加拿大的比较
JAMA. 2009 Oct 7;302(13):1437-43. doi: 10.1001/jama.2009.1409.
5
Budget impact analysis: review of the state of the art.预算影响分析:技术现状综述。
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2005 Feb;5(1):65-79. doi: 10.1586/14737167.5.1.65.
6
Finding legitimacy for the role of budget impact in drug reimbursement decisions.探寻预算影响在药品报销决策中所起作用的合理性。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Jan;25(1):49-55. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090072.
7
The role of value for money in public insurance coverage decisions for drugs in Australia: a retrospective analysis 1994-2004.性价比在澳大利亚药品公共保险覆盖决策中的作用:1994 - 2004年回顾性分析
Med Decis Making. 2008 Sep-Oct;28(5):713-22. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08315247. Epub 2008 Mar 31.
8
Role of budget impact in drug reimbursement decisions.预算影响在药品报销决策中的作用。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2008 Apr;33(2):225-47. doi: 10.1215/03616878-2007-054.
9
Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: report of the ISPOR Task Force on good research practices--budget impact analysis.预算影响分析良好实践原则:ISPOR良好研究实践特别工作组——预算影响分析报告
Value Health. 2007 Sep-Oct;10(5):336-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00187.x.
10
The increasingly complex fourth hurdle for pharmaceuticals.制药行业日益复杂的第四道难关。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25(9):727-34. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200725090-00002.