SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2015
Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 7 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
32 citing papers in PubMed, 7 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of regulating drug insurance schemes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pharmaceutical policies: effects of educational or regulatory policies targeting prescribers.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019Pooled it
- Association Between Reimbursement Incentives and Physician Practice in Oncology: A Systematic Review.JAMA oncology · 2019Pooled it
- A systematic review of trials evaluating success factors of interventions with computerised clinical decision support.Implementation science : IS · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The role of the Quality and Outcomes Framework in the care of long-term conditions: a systematic review.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2017Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Antibiotic prescribing by non-medical healthcare professionals in primary care: a systematic review of effects on antibiotic use, patient experience, interprofessional relationships and job satisfaction.JAC-antimicrobial resistance · 2026Review
- Balancing patient choice and health system capacity: a system dynamics model of dialysis in Thailand.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Opioid deprescribing: rethinking policies to facilitate better patient outcomes.Pain management · 2025Review
- The effect of hospital budgeting system on physician-executives' budget cognitive consciousness and medical decision making.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Article
- Managing Pharmaceutical Costs in Health Systems: A Review of Affordability, Accessibility and Sustainability Strategies.Journal of market access & health policy · 2024Review
- Influencing Primary Care Antibiotic Prescription Behavior Using Financial Incentives.Production and operations management · 2024Article
- Exploring the Perceptions and Behaviours of UK Prescribers Concerning Novel Lipid-Lowering Agent Prescriptions: A Qualitative Study.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Financial indicators utilization among community pharmacists: A comprehensive study for pharmacy management.PloS one · 2024Article
- Exploring the effectiveness of demand-side retail pharmaceutical expenditure reforms : Cross-country evidence from weighted-average least squares estimation.International journal of health economics and management · 2023Article
- Implementation of Medicines Pricing Policies in Ghana: The Interplay of Policy Content, Actors' Participation, and Context.International journal of health policy and management · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the introduction of QOF quality improvement modules in English general practice: early findings from a rapid, qualitative exploration of implementation.BMJ open quality · 2022Article
- Determinants of drug expenditure in the Swiss healthcare market in 2006.BMC health services research · 2022Article
- Economic Aspects of Delivering Primary Care Services: An Evidence Synthesis to Inform Policy and Research Priorities.The Milbank quarterly · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe proportion of total healthcare expenditures spent on drugs has continued to grow in countries of all income categories. Policy-makers are under pressure to control pharmaceutical expenditures without adversely affecting quality of care. Financial incentives seeking to influence prescribers' behaviour include budgetary arrangements at primary care and hospital settings (pharmaceutical budget caps or targets), financial rewards for target behaviours or outcomes (pay for performance interventions) and reduced benefit margin for prescribers based on medicine sales and prescriptions (pharmaceutical reimbursement rate reduction policies). This is the first update of the original version of this review.
objectivesTo determine the effects of pharmaceutical policies using financial incentives to influence prescribers' practices on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (searched 29/01/2015); MEDLINE, Ovid SP (searched 29/01/2015); EMBASE, Ovid SP (searched 29/01/2015); International Network for Rational Use of Drugs (INRUD) Bibliography (searched 29/01/2015); National Health Service (NHS) Economic Evaluation Database (searched 29/01/2015); EconLit - ProQuest (searched 02/02/2015); and Science Citation Index and Social Sciences Citation Index, Institute for Scientific Information (ISI) Web of Knowledge (citation search for included studies searched 10/02/2015). We screened the reference lists of relevant reports and contacted study authors and organisations to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included policies that intend to affect prescribing by means of financial incentives for prescribers. Included in this category are pharmaceutical budget caps or targets, pay for performance and drug reimbursement rate reductions and other financial policies, if they were specifically targeted at prescribing or drug utilisation. Policies in this review were defined as laws, rules, regulations and financial and administrative orders made or implemented by payers such as national or local governments, non-government organisations, private or social insurers and insurance-like organisations. One of the following outcomes had to be reported: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes or costs. The study had to be a randomised or non-randomised trial, an interrupted time series (ITS) analysis, a repeated measures study or a controlled before-after (CBA) study. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently assessed eligibility for inclusion of studies and risks of bias using Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) criteria and extracted data from the included studies. For CBA studies, we reported relative effects (e.g. adjusted relative change). The review team re-analysed all ITS results. When possible, the review team also re-analysed CBA data as ITS data. MAIN
resultsEighteen evaluations (six new studies) of pharmaceutical policies from six high-income countries met our inclusion criteria. Fourteen studies evaluated pharmaceutical budget policies in the UK (nine studies), two in Germany and Ireland and one each in Sweden and Taiwan. Three studies assessed pay for performance policies in the UK (two) and the Netherlands (one). One study from Taiwan assessed a reimbursement rate reduction policy. ITS analyses had some limitations. All CBA studies had serious limitations. No study from low-income or middle-income countries met the inclusion criteria.Pharmaceutical budgets may lead to a modest reduction in drug use (median relative change -2.8%; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effects of the policy on drug costs or healthcare utilisation, as the certainty of such evidence has been assessed as very low. Effects of this policy on health outcomes were not reported. Effects of pay for performance policies on drug use and health outcomes are uncertain, as the certainty of such evidence has been assessed as very low. Effects of this policy on drug costs and healthcare utilisation have not been measured. Effects of the reimbursement rate reduction policy on drug use and drug costs are uncertain, as the certainty of such evidence has been assessed as very low. No included study assessed the effects of this policy on healthcare utilisation or health outcomes. Administration costs of the policies were not reported in any of the included studies. AUTHORS'
conclusionsAlthough financial incentives are considered an important element in strategies to change prescribing patterns, limited evidence of their effects can be found. Effects of policies, including pay for performance policies, in improving quality of care and health outcomes remain uncertain. Because pharmaceutical policies have uncertain effects, and because they might cause harm as well as benefit, proper evaluation of these policies is needed. Future studies should consider the impact of these policies on health outcomes, drug use and overall healthcare expenditures, as well as on drug expenditures.
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.