Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32351382›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in pharmacology2020

Funding and Service Organization to Achieve Universal Health Coverage for Medicines: An Economic Evaluation of the Best Investment and Service Organization for the Brazilian Scenario.

Marina Morgado Garcia, Pamela Santos Azevedo, Andrew Mirelman, Leandro Pinheiro Safatle, Roberto Iunes, Marion Clark Bennie, Brian Godman, Augusto Afonso Guerra Junior

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Marina Morgado GarciaDepartment of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Pamela Santos AzevedoDepartment of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.
Andrew MirelmanCentre for Health Economics, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
Leandro Pinheiro SafatleDepartment of Medicines Market Regulation - Brazilian Health Regulatory Agency (ANVISA), Brasília, Brazil.
Roberto IunesWorld Bank Group, Washington, DC, United States.
Marion Clark BennieDepartment of Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Brian GodmanDepartment of Pharmacoepidemiology, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, United Kingdom.
Augusto Afonso Guerra JuniorDepartment of Social Pharmacy, Federal University of Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, Brazil.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere are many health benefits since 31 years after the foundation of the National Health Service (NHS) in Brazil, especially the increase in life expectancy. However, family-income inequalities, insufficient funding, and suboptimal private sector-public sector collaboration are still areas for improvement. The efforts of Brazil to achieve universal health coverage (UHC) for medicines have resulted in increased public financing of medicines and their availability, reducing avoidable hospitalization and mortality. However, lack of access to medicines still remains. Due to historical reasons, pharmaceutical service organization in developing countries may have important differences from high-income countries. In some cases, developing countries finance and promote medicine access by using the public infrastructure of health care/medical units as dispensing sites and cover all costs of medicines dispensed. In contrast, many high-income countries use private community pharmacies and cover the costs of medicines dispensed plus a fee, which includes all logistic costs. In this study, we will undertake an economic evaluation to understand the funding needs of the Brazilian NHS to reduce inequalities in access to medicines through adopting a pharmaceutical service organization similar to that seen in many high-income countries with hiring/accrediting private pharmacies.

methodsWe performed an economic evaluation of a model to provide access to medicines within public funds based on a decision tree model with two alternative scenarios public pharmacies (NHS, state-owned facilities)

findingsThe model without rebates for medicines estimated an incremental cost of US$3.1 billion in purchasing power parity (PPP) but with an increase in the average availability of medicines from 65% to 90% for citizens across the country irrespective of family income. This amount places the NHS in a very good position to negotiate extensive rebates without the need for external reference pricing for government purchases. Forecast scenarios above 35% rebates place the alternative of hiring private pharmacies as dominant. Higher rebate rates are feasible and may lead to savings of more than US$1.3 billion per year (30%). The impact of incremental funding is related to medicine access improvement of 25% in the second year when paying by dispensing fee. The estimate of the incremental budget in five years would be US$4.8 billion PPP. We have yet to explore the potential reduction in hospital and outpatient costs, as well as in lawsuits, with increased availability with the yearly expenses for these at US$9 billion and US$1.4 billion PPP respectively in 2017.

interpretationThe results of the economic evaluation demonstrate potential savings for the NHS and society. Achieving UHC for medicines reduces household expenses with health costs, health litigation, outpatient care, hospitalization, and mortality. An optimal private sector-public sector collaboration model with private community pharmacy accreditation is economically dominant with a feasible medicine price negotiation. The results show the potential to improve access to medicines by 25% for all income classes. This is most beneficial to the poorest families, whose medicines account for 76% of their total health expenses, with potential savings of lives and public resources.

Indexed as

access to medicinesBrazilhealth inequalitiesmedicines policypharmacoecomomicspharmacy funding modelsUniversal Health Coverage (UHC)

Identifiers

PMID32351382
PMCPMC7175689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.