Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany.
CINCH Health Economics Research Center and Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, University of Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Health Econ. 2020 Oct;29 Suppl 1:63-82. doi: 10.1002/hec.4108. Epub 2020 Jun 15.
Payers are increasingly calling for the value of new drugs to be measured explicitly. We analyze how the availability of drug quality ratings by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies affects the adoption of new drugs by physicians in Germany. We combine data from drug quality ratings, promotional spending, and a physician panel. In a latent utility model, time to adoption is specified as a function of quality rating, promotional spending by manufacturers, and physician-specific variables. As expected, drugs with a positive rating were adopted faster (p < 0.001) than those without. However, our results suggest that it was the publication of the quality rating itself that affected adoption. Indeed, before a quality rating was published, drugs that went on to receive a positive quality rating were not adopted significantly faster than drugs that went on to receive a negative quality rating. In contrast, after the publication of the HTA quality rating, drugs with a positive rating were adopted significantly faster than those without (p < 0.05). The per physician value of a positive quality rating was EUR 393.50. Our results suggest that there are returns from HTAs beyond their use in price negotiations.
支付者越来越多地呼吁明确衡量新药的价值。我们分析了药品质量评估机构提供的药品质量评估对德国医生采用新药的影响。我们结合了药品质量评估、促销支出和医生小组的数据。在潜在效用模型中，采用时间被指定为质量评估、制造商促销支出和医生特定变量的函数。正如预期的那样，具有正面评价的药物被采用的速度更快（p<0.001）。然而，我们的结果表明，正是质量评估的发布影响了采用。事实上，在发布质量评估之前，获得正面质量评估的药物并没有比获得负面质量评估的药物更快被采用。相比之下，在 HTA 质量评估发布后，获得正面评价的药物的采用速度明显快于没有获得正面评价的药物（p<0.05）。阳性质量评价对每位医生的价值为 393.50 欧元。我们的结果表明，除了在价格谈判中的应用之外，HTA 还有回报。
