Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
- PMID: 22046102
- PMCID: PMC3202480
- DOI: 10.2147/CEOR.S14407
Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to compare centralized reimbursement/coverage decision-making processes for health technologies in 23 European countries, according to: mandate, authority, structure, and policy options; mechanisms for identifying, selecting, and evaluating technologies; clinical and economic evidence expectations; committee composition, procedures, and factors considered; available conditional reimbursement options for promising new technologies; and the manufacturers' roles in the process.
Methods: A comprehensive review of publicly available information from peer-reviewed literature (using a variety of bibliographic databases) and gray literature (eg, working papers, committee reports, presentations, and government documents) was conducted. Policy experts in each of the 23 countries were also contacted. All information collected was reviewed by two independent researchers.
Results: Most European countries have established centralized reimbursement systems for making decisions on health technologies. However, the scope of technologies considered, as well as processes for identifying, selecting, and reviewing them varies. All systems include an assessment of clinical evidence, compiled in accordance with their own guidelines or internationally recognized published ones. In addition, most systems require an economic evaluation. The quality of such information is typically assessed by content and methodological experts. Committees responsible for formulating recommendations or decisions are multidisciplinary. While criteria used by committees appear transparent, how they are operationalized during deliberations remains unclear. Increasingly, reimbursement systems are expressing interest in and/or implementing reimbursement policy options that extend beyond the traditional "yes," "no," or "yes with restrictions" options. Such options typically require greater involvement of manufacturers which, to date, has been limited.
Conclusion: Centralized reimbursement systems have become an important policy tool in many European countries. Nevertheless, there remains a lack of transparency around critical elements, such as how multiple factors or criteria are weighed during committee deliberations.
Keywords: Europe; centralized review; health technologies; reimbursement.
Similar articles
-
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5. Eur J Health Econ. 2008. PMID: 18987905
-
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001. JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009. PMID: 27820426
-
A Comparison of Reimbursement Recommendations by European HTA Agencies: Is There Opportunity for Further Alignment?Front Pharmacol. 2017 Jun 30;8:384. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2017.00384. eCollection 2017. Front Pharmacol. 2017. PMID: 28713265 Free PMC article.
-
Digital Health Reimbursement Strategies of 8 European Countries and Israel: Scoping Review and Policy Mapping.JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023 Sep 29;11:e49003. doi: 10.2196/49003. JMIR Mhealth Uhealth. 2023. PMID: 37773610 Free PMC article.
-
Pricing and Reimbursement of Patent-Protected Medicines: Challenges and Lessons from South-Eastern Europe.Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021 Nov;19(6):915-927. doi: 10.1007/s40258-021-00678-w. Epub 2021 Sep 23. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2021. PMID: 34553334 Review.
Cited by
-
Decision-makers' preferences for approving new medicines in Wales: a discrete-choice experiment with assessment of external validity.Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 Apr;31(4):345-55. doi: 10.1007/s40273-013-0030-0. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013. PMID: 23516033
-
Development of the WHO-INTEGRATE evidence-to-decision framework: an overview of systematic reviews of decision criteria for health decision-making.Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2020 Feb 11;18:8. doi: 10.1186/s12962-020-0203-6. eCollection 2020. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2020. PMID: 32071560 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Transparency in reimbursement decisions: in whose best interest?Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Aug;32(8):725-7. doi: 10.1007/s40273-014-0176-4. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014. PMID: 24866390 No abstract available.
-
HTA Implementation Roadmap in Central and Eastern European Countries.Health Econ. 2016 Feb;25 Suppl 1(Suppl Suppl 1):179-92. doi: 10.1002/hec.3298. Epub 2016 Jan 14. Health Econ. 2016. PMID: 26763688 Free PMC article.
-
Revealed and Stated Preferences of Decision Makers for Priority Setting in Health Technology Assessment: A Systematic Review.Pharmacoeconomics. 2018 Mar;36(3):323-340. doi: 10.1007/s40273-017-0586-1. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018. PMID: 29124632
References
-
- Ottawa, ON: Government of Canada, Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs; 2002. The health of Canadians: The federal role. Final report. Volume 6: Recommendations for reform. Available from: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/372/soci/rep/repoct02vol6-e.htm. Accessed July 22, 2011.
-
- Wilking N, Jonsson B. A pan-European comparison regarding patient access to cancer drugs. Stockholm, Sweden: Karolinska Institutet; 2006. Available from: http://ki.se/content/1/c4/33/52/Cancer_Report.pdf. Accessed March 13, 2011. - PubMed
-
- Stafinski T, Menon D, Philippon DJ, McCabe C. Health technology funding decision-making processes around the world the same, yet different. Pharmacoeconomics. 2011;29:1–21. - PubMed
-
- Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development . Health Technologies and Decision Making. Paris, France: Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; 2005.
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources