IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v35y2017i8d10.1007_s40273-017-0514-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Defining and Measuring the Affordability of New Medicines: A Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • Fernando Antoñanzas

    () (University of La Rioja)

  • Robert Terkola

    (University of Florida
    University of Groningen)

  • Paul M. Overton

    (Beacon Medical Communications)

  • Natalie Shalet

    (NAS Healthcare Solutions)

  • Maarten Postma

    (University of Groningen
    University of Groningen
    University of Groningen)

Abstract

Background In many healthcare systems, affordability concerns can lead to restrictions on the use of expensive efficacious therapies. However, there does not appear to be any consensus as to the terminology used to describe affordability, or the thresholds used to determine whether new drugs are affordable. Objectives The aim of this systematic review was to investigate how affordability is defined and measured in healthcare. Methods MEDLINE, EMBASE and EconLit databases (2005–July 2016) were searched using terms covering affordability and budget impact, combined with definitions, thresholds and restrictions, to identify articles describing a definition of affordability with respect to new medicines. Additional definitions were identified through citation searching, and through manual searches of European health technology assessment body websites. Results In total, 27 definitions were included in the review. Of these, five definitions described affordability in terms of the value of a product; seven considered affordability within the context of healthcare system budgets; and 15 addressed whether products are affordable in a given country based on economic factors. However, there was little in the literature to indicate that the price of medicines is considered alongside both their value to individual patients and their budget impact at a population level. Conclusions Current methods of assessing affordability in healthcare may be limited by their focus on budget impact. A more effective approach may involve a broader perspective than is currently described in the literature, to consider the long-term benefits of a therapy and cost savings elsewhere in the healthcare system, as well as cooperation between healthcare payers and the pharmaceutical industry to develop financing models that support sustainability as well as innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Fernando Antoñanzas & Robert Terkola & Paul M. Overton & Natalie Shalet & Maarten Postma, 2017. "Defining and Measuring the Affordability of New Medicines: A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 777-791, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0514-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-017-0514-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-017-0514-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mauskopf, Josephine & Chirila, Costel & Birt, Julie & Boye, Kristina S. & Bowman, Lee, 2013. "Drug reimbursement recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence: Have they impacted the National Health Service budget?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(1), pages 49-59.
    2. Giuseppe Carone & Christoph Schwierz & Ana Xavier, 2012. "Cost-containment policies in public pharmaceutical spending in the EU," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 461, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    3. Brockis, E. & Marsden, G. & Cole, A. & Devlin, N., 2016. "A Review of NICE Methods Across Health Technology Assessment Programmes: Differences, Justifications and Implications," Research Papers 001703, Office of Health Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:35:y:2017:i:8:d:10.1007_s40273-017-0514-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.