School of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, SA5000, Australia.
College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Bedford Park, SA5042, Australia.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020 Nov 3;37:e28. doi: 10.1017/S0266462320000823.
The frameworks used by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies for value assessment of medicines aim to optimize healthcare resource allocation. However, they may not be effective at capturing the value of antimicrobial drugs.
To analyze stakeholder perceptions regarding how antimicrobials are assessed for value for reimbursement purposes and how the Australian HTA framework accommodates the unique attributes of antimicrobials in cost-effectiveness evaluation.
Eighteen individuals representing the pharmaceutical industry or policy-makers were interviewed. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded, and thematically analyzed.
Key emergent themes were that reimbursement decision-making should consider the antibiotic spectrum when assessing value, risk of shortages, the impact of procurement processes on low-priced comparators, and the need for methodological transparency when antimicrobials are incorporated into the economic evaluation of other treatments.
Participants agreed that the current HTA framework for antimicrobial value assessment is inadequate to properly inform funding decisions, as the contemporary definition of cost-effectiveness fails to explicitly incorporate the risk of future resistance. Policy-makers were uncertain about how to incorporate future resistance into economic evaluations without a systematic method to capture costs avoided due to good stewardship. Lacking financial reward for the benefits of narrower-spectrum antimicrobials, companies will likely focus on developing broad-spectrum agents with wider potential use. The perceived risks of shortages have influenced the funding of generic antimicrobials in Australia, with policy-makers suggesting a willingness to pay more for assured supply. Although antibiotics often underpin the effectiveness of other medicines, it is unclear how this is incorporated into economic models.
卫生技术评估(HTA)机构用于评估药品价值的框架旨在优化医疗资源配置。然而,它们可能无法有效地评估抗菌药物的价值。
分析利益相关者对评估药品用于报销目的的价值的看法,以及澳大利亚 HTA 框架如何在成本效益评估中适应抗菌药物的独特属性。
对代表制药行业或决策者的 18 人进行了访谈。访谈逐字记录、编码并进行主题分析。
主要出现的主题是,在评估价值时,报销决策应考虑抗生素的光谱范围、短缺风险、采购过程对低价对照品的影响,以及在将抗生素纳入其他治疗方法的经济评估时需要方法学透明度。
参与者一致认为,目前用于评估抗菌药物价值的 HTA 框架不足以正确为资金决策提供信息,因为当前的成本效益定义没有明确纳入对未来耐药性的风险。政策制定者不确定如何在没有系统方法来捕获因良好管理而避免的成本的情况下将未来耐药性纳入经济评估。由于缺乏对较窄光谱抗生素的收益的财务奖励,公司可能会专注于开发具有更广泛潜在用途的广谱药物。短缺风险影响了澳大利亚对抗生素的资金投入,政策制定者表示愿意为确保供应支付更高的费用。尽管抗生素通常是其他药物有效性的基础,但尚不清楚如何将其纳入经济模型。