Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16625648›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2006

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of reference pricing, other pricing, and purchasing policies.

M Aaserud, A T Dahlgren, J P Kösters, A D Oxman, C Ramsay, H Sturm

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 7 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 7 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of restrictions on reimbursement.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2010
    Pooled it
  6. Increased police patrols for preventing alcohol-impaired driving.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2008
    Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Estimated cost of universal public coverage of prescription drugs in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2015
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Addressing cost-related barriers to prescription drug use in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2014
    Article
  17. Trend analysis of the pharmaceutical market in Iran; 1997-2010; policy implications for developing countries.Daru : journal of Faculty of Pharmacy, Tehran University of Medical Sciences · 2013
    Article
  18. Drug expenditure of high-cost patients and their characteristics in Finland.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2013
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Patient socioeconomic determinants for the choice of the cheapest molecule within a cluster: evidence from Belgian prescription data.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2012
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

M AaserudNorwegian Knowledge Centre for Health Services, Department of Health Services Research, PO Box 7004 St Olavs Plass, Universitetsgaten 2, Oslo, Norway, 0130. Morten.Aaserud@kunnskapssenteret.no
A T Dahlgren
J P Kösters
A D Oxman
C Ramsay
H Sturm

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPharmaceuticals can be important for people's health. At the same time drugs are major components of health care costs. Pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies are used to determine or affect the prices that are paid for drugs. Examples are price controls, maximum prices, price negotiations, reference pricing, index pricing and volume-based pricing policies. The essence of reference pricing is to establish a maximum level of reimbursement for a group of drugs assumed to be therapeutically equivalent.

objectivesTo determine the effects of pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the following databases and web sites: Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Register (date of last search: 22/08/03), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (15/10/03), MEDLINE (07/09/05), EMBASE (07/09/05), ISI Web of Science (08/09/05), CSA Worldwide Political Science Abstracts (21/10/03), EconLit (23/10/03), SIGLE (12/11/03), INRUD (21/11/03), PAIS International (23/03/04), International Political Science Abstracts (09/01/04), NHS EED (20/02/04), PubMed (25/02/04), NTIS (03/03/04), IPA (22/04/04), OECD Publications & Documents (30/08/05), SourceOECD (30/08/05), World Bank Documents & Reports (30/08/05), World Bank e-Library (04/05/05), JOLIS (22/08/05), Global Jolis (22/08/05 and 23/08/05), WHOLIS (29/08/05). SELECTION CRITERIA: Policies in this review were defined as laws, rules, financial and administrative orders made by governments, non-government organisations or private insurers. To be included a study had to include an objective measure of at least one of the following outcomes: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes, and costs (expenditures); the study must be a randomised controlled trial, non-randomised controlled trial, interrupted time series analysis, repeated measures study or controlled before-after study of a pharmaceutical pricing or purchasing policy for a large jurisdiction or system of care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. Quantitative analysis of time series data, for studies with sufficient data, and qualitative analyses were undertaken. MAIN

resultsWe included 10 studies of reference pricing and one study of index pricing. Most of the reference pricing studies were for senior citizens in British Columbia, Canada. The use (dispensing) of reference drugs increased in five studies, between 60% and 196% immediately after introduction of reference drug pricing, whereas the use of cost sharing drugs decreased by between 19% and 42% in four studies. In three studies the reference drug group expenditures decreased (range 19% - 50%), whereas in the fourth study the expenditures increased by 5% in the short term. The results after six months of reference pricing do not show any clear pattern in relationship to the immediate effects. We found no evidence of adverse effects on health and no clear evidence of increased health care utilisation. For index pricing the evidence was much more limited than for reference drug pricing. A small reduction in drug prices was found. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWe found relatively few studies of pricing policies. The majority of the studies dealt with reference pricing. They had few methodological limitations. Based on the evidence in this review, mostly from senior citizens in British Columbia, Canada, reference drug pricing can reduce third party drug expenditures by inducing a shift in drug use towards less expensive drugs. We found no evidence of adverse effects on health and no clear evidence of increased health care utilisation. The analysis and reporting of the effects on patient drug expenditures were limited in the included studies and administration costs were not reported.

Indexed as

Drug CostsHealth ExpendituresCost ControlCost SharingDrug and Narcotic ControlEconomics, PharmaceuticalHealth Services Needs and DemandInsurance, Health, Reimbursement

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.