Reference pricing of pharmaceuticals for Medicare: evidence from Germany, The Netherlands, and New Zealand.

Patricia M Danzon, Jonathan D Ketcham
{"title":"Reference pricing of pharmaceuticals for Medicare: evidence from Germany, The Netherlands, and New Zealand.","authors":"Patricia M Danzon,&nbsp;Jonathan D Ketcham","doi":"10.2202/1558-9544.1050","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper describes three prototypical systems of therapeutic reference pricing (RP) for pharmaceuticals--Germany, the Netherlands, and New Zealand--and examines their effects on the availability of new drugs, reimbursement levels, manufacturer prices, and out-of-pocket surcharges to patients. RP for pharmaceuticals is not simply analogous to a defined contribution approach to subsidizing insurance coverage. Although a major purpose of RP is to stimulate competition, theory suggests that the achievement of this goal is unlikely, and this is confirmed by the empirical evidence. Other effects of RP differ across countries in predictable ways, reflecting each country's system design and other cost-control policies. New Zealand's RP system has reduced reimbursement and limited the availability of new drugs, particularly more expensive drugs. Compared to these three countries, if RP were applied in the United States, it would likely have a more negative effect on prices of onpatent products because of the more competitive U.S. generic market, and on research and development (R&D) and the future supply of new drugs, because of the much larger U.S. share of global pharmaceutical sales.</p>","PeriodicalId":87181,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health policy research","volume":"7 ","pages":"1-54"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2202/1558-9544.1050","citationCount":"150","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health policy research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1558-9544.1050","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 150

Abstract

This paper describes three prototypical systems of therapeutic reference pricing (RP) for pharmaceuticals--Germany, the Netherlands, and New Zealand--and examines their effects on the availability of new drugs, reimbursement levels, manufacturer prices, and out-of-pocket surcharges to patients. RP for pharmaceuticals is not simply analogous to a defined contribution approach to subsidizing insurance coverage. Although a major purpose of RP is to stimulate competition, theory suggests that the achievement of this goal is unlikely, and this is confirmed by the empirical evidence. Other effects of RP differ across countries in predictable ways, reflecting each country's system design and other cost-control policies. New Zealand's RP system has reduced reimbursement and limited the availability of new drugs, particularly more expensive drugs. Compared to these three countries, if RP were applied in the United States, it would likely have a more negative effect on prices of onpatent products because of the more competitive U.S. generic market, and on research and development (R&D) and the future supply of new drugs, because of the much larger U.S. share of global pharmaceutical sales.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
医疗保险药品参考定价:来自德国、荷兰和新西兰的证据。
本文描述了德国、荷兰和新西兰三个典型的药品治疗参考定价(RP)系统,并考察了它们对新药可用性、报销水平、制造商价格和患者自付附加费的影响。药品的RP不是简单地类似于补贴保险范围的固定缴款方法。虽然RP的主要目的是刺激竞争,但理论表明,这一目标的实现是不可能的,这一点得到了经验证据的证实。RP的其他影响以可预测的方式在各国有所不同,反映了每个国家的制度设计和其他成本控制政策。新西兰的RP系统减少了报销并限制了新药的可得性,特别是更昂贵的药物。与这三个国家相比,如果RP在美国应用,它可能会对非专利产品的价格产生更负面的影响,因为美国仿制药市场竞争更激烈,而且由于美国在全球药品销售中所占的份额更大,它可能会对研发(R&D)和未来的新药供应产生更负面的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Reference pricing of pharmaceuticals for Medicare: evidence from Germany, The Netherlands, and New Zealand. Adverse selection and the challenges to stand-alone prescription drug insurance. Disability forecasts and future Medicare costs. Benefit plan design and prescription drug utilization among asthmatics: do patient copayments matter? An economic analysis of health plan conversions: are they in the public interest?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1