Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20687098›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2010

Pharmaceutical policies: effects of restrictions on reimbursement.

Carolyn J Green, Malcolm Maclure, Patricia M Fortin, Craig R Ramsay, Morten Aaserud, Stan Bardal

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

26 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of regulating drug insurance schemes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Observational
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.

Carolyn J GreenDivision of Medical Sciences, University of Victoria, PO Box 3040 STN CSC, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, V8W 3N7.
Malcolm Maclure
Patricia M Fortin
Craig R Ramsay
Morten Aaserud
Stan Bardal
University of British Columbia · CAUniversity of Victoria · CANorwegian Medicines Agency · NOUniversity of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office HSRU2
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPublic policy makers and benefit plan managers need to restrain rising pharmaceutical drug costs while preserving access and optimizing health benefits.

objectivesTo determine the effects of a pharmaceutical policy restricting the reimbursement of selected medications on drug use, health care utilization, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the 14 major bibliographic databases and websites (to January 2009). SELECTION CRITERIA: Included were studies of pharmaceutical policies that restrict coverage and reimbursement of selected drugs or drug classes, often using additional patient specific information related to health status or need. We included randomised controlled trials, non-randomised controlled trials, interrupted time series (ITS) analyses, repeated measures studies and controlled before-after studies set in large care systems or jurisdictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. Quantitative re-analysis of time series data was undertaken for studies with sufficient data. MAIN

resultsWe included 29 ITS analyses (12 were controlled) investigating policies targeting 11 drug classes for restriction. Participants were most often senior citizens or low income adult populations, or both, in publically subsidized or administered pharmaceutical benefit plans. Impact of policies varied by drug class and whether restrictions were implemented or relaxed. When policies targeted gastric-acid suppressant and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug classes, decreased drug use and substantial savings on drugs occurred immediately and for up to two years afterwards, with no increase in the use of other health services (6 studies). Targeting second generation antipsychotic drugs increased treatment discontinuity and the use of other health services without reducing overall drug expenditures (2 studies). Relaxing restrictions for reimbursement of antihypertensives and statins increased appropriate use and decreased overall drug expenditures. Two studies which measured health outcomes directly were inconclusive. AUTHORS'

conclusionsImplementing restrictions to coverage and reimbursement of selected medications can decrease third-party drug spending without increasing the use of other health services (6 studies). Relaxing reimbursement rules for drugs used for secondary prevention can also remove barriers to access. Policy design, however, needs to be based on research quantifying the harm and benefit profiles of target and alternative drugs to avoid unwanted health system and health effects. Health impact evaluation should be conducted where drugs are not interchangeable. Impacts on health equity, relating to the fair and just distribution of health benefits in society (sustainable access to publically financed drug benefits for seniors and low income populations, for example), also require explicit measurement.

Indexed as

AdultAgedDrug CostsHealth Care CostsHealth ServicesHumansInsurance, Pharmaceutical ServicesPrescription DrugsProcess Assessment, Health CareReimbursement MechanismsPrescription Drugs

Identifiers

PMID20687098
PMCPMC6791298
OpenAlexW1921052567

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.