SynthesisJournal of health services research & policy2015
International experience in controlling pharmaceutical expenditure: influencing patients and providers and regulating industry - a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of health services research & policy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.
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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Strategic Delay and Bargaining Over Public Insurance Coverage for Drugs in Australia.Health economics · 2026Article
- Tiered manufacturing of pharmaceuticals as a commercial determinant of health: Implications for medicine quality and equity.PLOS global public health · 2026Article
- Managing Pharmaceutical Costs in Health Systems: A Review of Affordability, Accessibility and Sustainability Strategies.Journal of market access & health policy · 2024Review
- Effects of transparent online open procurement on prices, volumes, and costs of medicines: an interrupted time series study in Ningxia, China.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- The impact of external reference pricing on pharmaceutical costs and market dynamics.Health policy OPEN · 2023Article
- When Reality Does Not Meet Expectations-Experiences and Perceived Attitudes of Dutch Stakeholders Regarding Payment and Reimbursement Models for High-Priced Hospital Drugs.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- The impacts of the "4+7" pilot policy on the volume, expenditures, and daily cost of Serotonin-Specific Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) antidepressants: A quasi-experimental study.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2022Article
- The Effects of the National Centralized Drug Purchasing Pilot Program on Nucleos(t)ide Analogs in Shenzhen City: An Interrupted Time Series Analysis.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Trends in national pharmaceutical expenditure on diabetes in Ireland 2011-2015: a repeated cross-sectional study.BMJ open · 2020Article
- Containing medical expenditure: lessons from reform of Beijing public hospitals.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2019Article
- Comparing the Medicaid Prospective Drug Utilization Review Program Cost-Savings Methods Used by State Agencies in 2015 and 2016.American health & drug benefits · 2019Article
- The impact of generics and generic reference pricing on candesartan and rosuvastatin utilisation, price and expenditure in South Africa.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2019Article
- Effects of a price cut reform on the cost and utilization of antidiabetic drugs in Korea: a national health insurance database study.BMC health services research · 2018Article
- Effects of Guideline and Formulary Changes on Statin Prescribing in the Veterans Affairs.Health services research · 2017Article
- Regulation of the pharmaceutical industry: promoting health or protecting wealth?Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine · 2015Article
- Will We Ever Bend the Cost Curve in Healthcare?American health & drug benefitsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo review international policies to control expenditure on pharmaceuticals by influencing the behaviour of patients and providers and regulating the pharmaceutical industry.
methodSystematic review of experimental and quasi-experimental studies. Published studies were identified with an electronic search strategy using MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1980 to May 2012. Studies were eligible if they assessed the effect of policies aimed at influencing the behaviour of patients and providers, and regulating the pharmaceutical industry. Outcome measures included pharmaceutical expenditure, prices or utilization; other resource use relating to pharmaceuticals; and health outcomes and patients' or providers' behaviour relating to pharmaceutical use. Quality assessment criteria for each study design were developed based on the standard criteria recommended by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) group. The review includes studies based on randomized controlled trials and rigorous quasi-experimental designs (interrupted time-series and controlled before-and-after studies). Studies were excluded if they were conducted within a single hospital or practice; related to pharmaceutical care services or disease management; had less than 6 months of follow-up period (or less than 12 months overall for interrupted time series); if data in controlled before-and-after studies were not collected contemporaneously or if no rationale was stated for the choice of control group; or if relevant and interpretable data were not presented.
resultsA total of 255 studies met the inclusion criteria for this review. The majority of the studies relating to patients evaluated cost sharing interventions such as user charges (52 studies). User charges do reduce utilization of pharmaceuticals, and reduce public expenditure by shifting costs to patients. But they reduce the use of essential as well as non-essential drugs, and without adequate exemptions they affect vulnerable groups disproportionately. The majority of studies relating to doctors evaluated the effects of educational approaches (78 studies), reimbursement restrictions (48 studies) and incentive systems (22 studies). Evidence on these policies is of mixed quality. It appears possible to influence prescribing modestly, through various means, but it is essential that messages to prescribers are based on good evidence of effectiveness and cost-effectiveness. Twenty-nine studies related to industry regulation, and they were of mixed quality. Evidence from studies of reference pricing suggests that this may result in cost savings. These are, however, achieved not by companies reducing or restraining prices, or by reductions in the overall volume of prescriptions, but by some shifts in use and shifting costs to patients, with consequent adverse effects on the equity of access to medicines. Other price and profit controls remain almost completely lacking in evaluative evidence.
conclusionsIt may be that the undesirable consequences of policies influencing patients, particularly user charges, can outweigh the benefits. To influence demand for pharmaceuticals, it is more appropriate to influence prescribing doctors and although interventions to improve prescribing practice have been developed, they often achieve relatively modest benefits and sometimes at high cost. Good evaluative evidence related to industry regulation is scarce despite its policy importance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.