• 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

基于绩效的风险分担安排(PBRSA):对于我们国家和世界各地的药品报销策略,这是一种增加效益的解决方案吗?

Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements (PBRSA): Is it a Solution to Increase Bang for the Buck for Pharmaceutical Reimbursement Strategy for Our Nation and Around the World?

机构信息

Shenandoah University Bernard J. Dunn School of Pharmacy, 1775 North Sector Ct, Winchester, VA, 22601, USA.

Torrid Inc., 18501 East San Jose Ave, City of Industry, CA, 91748, USA.

出版信息

Clin Drug Investig. 2020 Dec;40(12):1107-1113. doi: 10.1007/s40261-020-00972-w. Epub 2020 Oct 9.

DOI:10.1007/s40261-020-00972-w
PMID:33037566
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7546145/
Abstract

Due to the risks involved in not achieving desired health outcomes for the dollar spent on drugs, healthcare decision makers, including payers, providers, drug manufacturers, and patients, need a mechanism to share this financial risk among the involved parties. Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements (PBRSAs) are agreements that can potentially reduce the 'drug lag' in which patients wait for an unknown amount of time until a particular drug is covered under their health plan. In addition, PBRSAs can mitigate the risk of investing heavily in drugs that are ineffective or do not deliver good value or "bang for the buck". This review describes and evaluates PBRSAs for drugs in the USA and juxtaposes to other developed nations (i.e. Germany) that adopted PBRSAs in their healthcare model. There are different types of outcomes-based health schemes, namely conditional coverage, which can be further broken down into coverage with evidence development (CED), conditional treatment continuation (CTC), and performance-linked reimbursement, which includes outcomes guarantees. Both CED and CTC are 'conditional' on the collected evidence of the new drug's effectiveness, offering discount only if the drug delivers desirable results. The outcomes guarantee scheme offers discount or even a full refund if the outcome is less than expected, forcing the drug to meet the expected effectiveness. The USA can follow the German reference pricing model in which the assessment of new drugs is centralized and done collectively by representatives from a group of healthcare decision makers. In any shape or form, PBRSA is a clever mechanism to cope with uncertainty if drug price is scaled appropriately based on value.

摘要

由于在药物支出方面未能实现预期健康结果所带来的风险,医疗保健决策者(包括支付方、提供者、药品制造商和患者)需要一种机制,在相关方之间分担这种财务风险。基于绩效的风险分担安排(PBRSAs)是一种协议,有可能减少“药物滞后”现象,即患者需要等待未知的时间,直到他们的健康计划涵盖特定药物。此外,PBRSAs 可以降低对无效或提供不佳价值或“物有所值”的药物进行大量投资的风险。本综述描述和评估了美国的药物 PBRSAs,并将其与其他发达国家(如德国)的医疗模式进行了对比,这些国家在其医疗模式中采用了 PBRSAs。有不同类型的基于结果的健康计划,即有条件覆盖,可以进一步细分为有证据开发的覆盖(CED)、有条件治疗延续(CTC)和与绩效相关的报销,其中包括结果保证。CED 和 CTC 都“有条件”地基于新药有效性的收集证据,如果药物没有达到理想的效果,仅提供折扣。如果结果低于预期,结果保证计划将提供折扣甚至全额退款,迫使药物达到预期的疗效。美国可以效仿德国的参考定价模式,其中新药的评估是集中进行的,并由一组医疗保健决策者的代表集体进行。无论采用何种形式,PBRSA 都是一种应对不确定性的巧妙机制,如果根据价值对药物价格进行适当调整的话。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6cf5/7546145/2cd30b283bd1/40261_2020_972_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6cf5/7546145/2cd30b283bd1/40261_2020_972_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6cf5/7546145/2cd30b283bd1/40261_2020_972_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements (PBRSA): Is it a Solution to Increase Bang for the Buck for Pharmaceutical Reimbursement Strategy for Our Nation and Around the World?基于绩效的风险分担安排(PBRSA):对于我们国家和世界各地的药品报销策略,这是一种增加效益的解决方案吗?
Clin Drug Investig. 2020 Dec;40(12):1107-1113. doi: 10.1007/s40261-020-00972-w. Epub 2020 Oct 9.
2
Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements-good practices for design, implementation, and evaluation: report of the ISPOR good practices for performance-based risk-sharing arrangements task force.基于绩效的风险分担安排——设计、实施和评估的良好实践:ISPOR 基于绩效的风险分担安排良好实践工作组的报告。
Value Health. 2013 Jul-Aug;16(5):703-19. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2013.04.011. Epub 2013 Jul 19.
3
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements for Pharmaceutical Products in the United States: A Systematic Review.美国药品的基于绩效的风险分担安排:系统评价。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Oct;23(10):1028-1040. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.10.1028.
4
Current status and trends in performance-based risk-sharing arrangements between healthcare payers and medical product manufacturers.医疗保健支付方与医疗产品制造商之间基于绩效的风险分担安排的现状与趋势
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2014 Jun;12(3):231-8. doi: 10.1007/s40258-014-0093-x.
5
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements: An Updated International Review.基于绩效的风险分担安排:最新国际综述。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2017 Oct;35(10):1063-1072. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0535-z.
6
[Risk sharing methods in middle income countries].[中等收入国家的风险分担方法]
Acta Pharm Hung. 2012;82(1):43-52.
7
Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements for devices and diagnostics in the United States: a systematic review.美国医疗器械和诊断试剂的基于绩效的风险分担安排:系统评价。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2022 Jan;28(1):78-83. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.1.78.
8
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements: U.S. Payer Experience.基于绩效的风险分担安排:美国支付方的经验。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Oct;23(10):1042-1052. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.10.1042.
9
Can't get no satisfaction? Will pay for performance help?: toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products.无法获得满足感?付费绩效能否有所帮助?:理解创新型医疗产品基于绩效的风险分担协议的经济框架。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):93-102. doi: 10.2165/11314080-000000000-00000.
10
Risk sharing arrangements for pharmaceuticals: potential considerations and recommendations for European payers.药品风险分担安排:对欧洲支付方的潜在考虑和建议。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2010 Jun 7;10:153. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-10-153.

引用本文的文献

1
Implementing performance-based risk-sharing agreements in non-small cell lung cancer immunotherapy: a real-world data case study.在非小细胞肺癌免疫治疗中实施基于绩效的风险分担协议:一项真实世界数据案例研究
Health Econ Rev. 2025 Jun 9;15(1):49. doi: 10.1186/s13561-025-00646-3.
2
Alternative Payment Models for Innovative Medicines: A Framework for Effective Implementation.创新药物的替代支付模式:有效实施框架
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2025 Apr 2. doi: 10.1007/s40258-025-00960-1.
3
Emerging, novel gene-modulating therapies for transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy.

本文引用的文献

1
Reference Pricing in Germany: Implications for U.S. Pharmaceutical Purchasing.德国的参考定价:对美国药品采购的影响。
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2019 Feb 1;2019:1-8.
2
Determining the Comparative Value of Pharmaceutical Risk-Sharing Policies in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Using Real-World Data.利用真实世界数据确定非小细胞肺癌药物风险分担政策的相对价值。
Value Health. 2019 Mar;22(3):322-331. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.08.007. Epub 2018 Oct 26.
3
PCSK9 Inhibitors: Economics and Policy.PCSK9 抑制剂:经济学与政策。
用于转甲状腺素蛋白淀粉样心肌病的新兴新型基因调节疗法。
Heart Fail Rev. 2025 Mar 8. doi: 10.1007/s10741-025-10502-5.
4
Design and Features of Pricing and Payment Schemes for Health Technologies: A Scoping Review and a Proposal for a Flexible Need-Driven Classification.医疗技术定价与支付方案的设计及特点:一项范围综述与灵活的需求驱动分类建议
Pharmacoeconomics. 2025 Jan;43(1):5-29. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01435-2. Epub 2024 Oct 15.
5
Performance-based reimbursement for digital therapeutics in Germany: A misconceptualized opportunity.德国数字疗法基于绩效的报销:一个被误解的机遇。
Digit Health. 2024 Sep 23;10:20552076241281199. doi: 10.1177/20552076241281199. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
6
The Knowledge and Application of Economics in Healthcare in a High-Income Country Today: The Case of Belgium.当今高收入国家医疗保健领域经济学的知识与应用:以比利时为例。
J Mark Access Health Policy. 2024 Sep 4;12(3):264-279. doi: 10.3390/jmahp12030021. eCollection 2024 Sep.
7
Commentary: Which Principles Should Apply for a National Strategy on Rare Diseases?述评:国家罕见病战略应遵循哪些原则?
Healthc Policy. 2024 Aug;19(4):27-31. doi: 10.12927/hcpol.2024.27353.
8
Modeling First-Line Daratumumab Use for Newly Diagnosed, Transplant-Ineligible, Multiple Myeloma: A Cost-Effectiveness and Risk Analysis for Healthcare Payers.达雷妥尤单抗用于新诊断的、不符合移植条件的多发性骨髓瘤一线治疗的建模:针对医疗保健支付方的成本效益和风险分析
Pharmacoecon Open. 2024 Sep;8(5):651-664. doi: 10.1007/s41669-024-00503-9. Epub 2024 Jun 20.
9
Opportunities and Threats of the Legally Facilitated Performance-Based Managed Entry Agreements in Slovakia: The Early-Adoption Perspective.斯洛伐克基于绩效的法定便利型管理进入协议的机遇与威胁:早期采用视角
Healthcare (Basel). 2023 Apr 19;11(8):1179. doi: 10.3390/healthcare11081179.
10
Association of exogenous factors with the access to innovative pharmaceutical products in Hungary.匈牙利创新药物获取与外源性因素的关联。
PLoS One. 2023 Feb 6;18(2):e0281280. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0281280. eCollection 2023.
J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017 Nov 28;70(21):2677-2687. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.001.
4
Performance-Based Risk-Sharing Arrangements for Pharmaceutical Products in the United States: A Systematic Review.美国药品的基于绩效的风险分担安排:系统评价。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2017 Oct;23(10):1028-1040. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.23.10.1028.
5
FDA Regulation of Prescription Drugs.美国食品药品监督管理局对处方药的监管
N Engl J Med. 2017 Feb 16;376(7):674-682. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra1602972.
6
Recommendations for Conduct, Methodological Practices, and Reporting of Cost-effectiveness Analyses: Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine.《健康与医疗领域成本效益分析的实施、方法学实践和报告推荐:第二版》。
JAMA. 2016 Sep 13;316(10):1093-103. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.12195.
7
Specialty Pharmaceuticals for Hyperlipidemia--Impact on Insurance Premiums.用于治疗高脂血症的专科药物——对保险费的影响。
N Engl J Med. 2015 Oct 22;373(17):1591-3. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1509863. Epub 2015 Oct 7.
8
Heart disease and stroke statistics--2014 update: a report from the American Heart Association.《2014年心脏病和中风统计数据更新:美国心脏协会报告》
Circulation. 2014 Jan 21;129(3):e28-e292. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.0000441139.02102.80. Epub 2013 Dec 18.
9
Coverage with evidence development, only in research, risk sharing, or patient access scheme? A framework for coverage decisions.有证据开发、仅在研究中、风险分担或患者准入计划的覆盖范围?覆盖范围决策的框架。
Value Health. 2012 May;15(3):570-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2011.12.013. Epub 2012 Mar 30.
10
What is value in health care?医疗保健中的价值是什么?
N Engl J Med. 2010 Dec 23;363(26):2477-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1011024. Epub 2010 Dec 8.