Evaluating Canadians' Values for Drug Coverage Decision Making.


Journal

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
ISSN: 1524-4733
Titre abrégé: Value Health
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 100883818

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2019
Historique:
received: 14 03 2018
revised: 14 08 2018
accepted: 15 08 2018
entrez: 6 3 2019
pubmed: 6 3 2019
medline: 18 4 2019
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Decision makers are facing growing challenges in prioritizing drugs for reimbursement because of soaring drug costs and increasing pressures on financial resources. In addition to cost and effectiveness, payers are using other values to dictate which drugs are prioritized for funding, yet there are limited data on the Canadian public's priorities. To measure the relative societal importance of values considered most relevant in informing drug reimbursement decisions in a representative sample of Canadians. An online survey of 2539 Canadians aged 19 years and older was performed in which 13 values used in drug funding prioritization were ranked and then weighted using an analytic hierarchy process. Canadians value safe and efficacious drugs that have certainty of evidence. The values ranked in the top 5 by most of our subjects were potential effect on quality of life (65.4%), severity of the disease (62.6%), ability of drug to work (61.1%), safety (60.5%), and potential to extend life (49.4%). Values related to patient or disease characteristics such as rarity, socioeconomic status, and health and lifestyle choices held the lowest rankings and weights. Canadians value, above all, treatment-related factors (eg, efficacy and safety) and disease-related factors (eg, severity and equity). Decision makers are currently using additional justifications to prioritize drugs for reimbursement, such as rarity and unmet need, which were not found to be highly valued by Canadians. Decision makers should integrate the public's values into a Canadian reimbursement framework for prioritization of drugs competing for limited funds.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Decision makers are facing growing challenges in prioritizing drugs for reimbursement because of soaring drug costs and increasing pressures on financial resources. In addition to cost and effectiveness, payers are using other values to dictate which drugs are prioritized for funding, yet there are limited data on the Canadian public's priorities.
OBJECTIVES OBJECTIVE
To measure the relative societal importance of values considered most relevant in informing drug reimbursement decisions in a representative sample of Canadians.
METHODS METHODS
An online survey of 2539 Canadians aged 19 years and older was performed in which 13 values used in drug funding prioritization were ranked and then weighted using an analytic hierarchy process.
RESULTS RESULTS
Canadians value safe and efficacious drugs that have certainty of evidence. The values ranked in the top 5 by most of our subjects were potential effect on quality of life (65.4%), severity of the disease (62.6%), ability of drug to work (61.1%), safety (60.5%), and potential to extend life (49.4%). Values related to patient or disease characteristics such as rarity, socioeconomic status, and health and lifestyle choices held the lowest rankings and weights.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Canadians value, above all, treatment-related factors (eg, efficacy and safety) and disease-related factors (eg, severity and equity). Decision makers are currently using additional justifications to prioritize drugs for reimbursement, such as rarity and unmet need, which were not found to be highly valued by Canadians. Decision makers should integrate the public's values into a Canadian reimbursement framework for prioritization of drugs competing for limited funds.

Identifiants

pubmed: 30832975
pii: S1098-3015(18)36142-4
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.08.008
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

362-369

Subventions

Organisme : CIHR
ID : 119193
Pays : Canada

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2019 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Shirin Rizzardo (S)

Pharmaceutical Services Division, British Columbia Ministry of Health, Victoria, BC, Canada.

Nick Bansback (N)

Faculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Nick Dragojlovic (N)

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Conor Douglas (C)

Department of Science and Technology Studies, York University, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Kathy H Li (KH)

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Craig Mitton (C)

Faculty of Medicine, School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Centre for Clinical Epidemiology and Evaluation, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Carlo Marra (C)

National School of Pharmacy, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.

Litsa Blanis (L)

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada.

Larry D Lynd (LD)

Centre for Health Evaluation and Outcome Sciences, Providence Health Care Research Institute, Vancouver, BC, Canada; Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Electronic address: larry.lynd@ubc.ca.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH