ArticlePharmacy world & science : PWS2008
Pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals in the Czech Republic and Sweden.
Article in Pharmacy world & science : PWS, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- A National Approach to Reimbursement Decision-Making on Drugs for Rare Diseases in Canada? Insights from Across the Ponds.Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante · 2015Pooled it
- Pooled it
- POPE study: rationale and methodology of a study to phenotype patients with COPD in Central and Eastern Europe.International journal of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease · 2016Observational
- Inequalities in medicine use in Central Eastern Europe: an empirical investigation of socioeconomic determinants in eight countries.International journal for equity in health · 2015Article
- Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo describe and compare price regulation and reimbursement in the Czech Republic and Sweden.
methodsLegal documents, government reports, statutory information, annual reports and scientific articles were searched using the keywords: pharmaceutical market regulation, drug policy, drug pricing, drug reimbursement and patients' participation in costs concerning both countries. Approaches to regulation and regulatory steps concerning prices were compared between the countries.
main outcome measure(i) Institutional responsibilities in pricing and reimbursement of pharmaceuticals; (ii) principles of patients' participation in costs on pharmaceuticals.
resultsSubstantial differences were found in terms of pricing. In the Czech Republic, the Ministry of Finance sets maximal prices for pharmaceuticals whereas in Sweden there is a process of price regulation combined with reimbursement decisions taken by the Pharmaceutical Benefits Board. Together with a system of state-owned pharmacies, this ensures that drug prices in Sweden are fixed at the same level throughout the country. In the Czech Republic, prices may differ, since only maximal price levels are set. In both countries, decisions about reimbursement are taken at the national or state level whereas insurance funds or county councils are responsible for covering costs. The private share of pharmaceutical expenditures is substantially lower in the Czech Republic, even though there is no maximal level for patient's co-payment, as there is in Sweden.
conclusionDifferences in price setting and some other regulations of the pharmaceutical market were found. Both systems are designed to promote rational use of pharmaceuticals; and are based on social solidarity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
17588212What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.