IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/iatfor/042012.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Medizinisch-technische Innovationen in der Gesundheitswirtschaft am Beispiel der Neuen Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden (NUB)

Author

Listed:
  • von Bandemer, Stephan
  • Merkel, Sebastian
  • Nimako-Doffour, Anna

Abstract

Medizinisch technische Innovationen in der Gesundheitswirtschaft benötigen Verfahren zur Refinanzierung neuartiger Leistungen. Ein wichtiges Instrument bildet das Verfahren für Neue Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden (NUB). Neben dem möglichen Fortschritt in der Versorgung wird allerdings befürchtet, dass durch entsprechende Innovationen die Kosten stark ansteigen und eine undifferenzierte Verbreitung erfolgt. In den vergangenen Jahren wurden aber nur sehr wenige NUB-Neuanträge anerkannt (Status 1). Auch die Umsetzung neuer Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden in die Versorgungspraxis erfolgt in den meisten Fällen sehr langsam. Neue Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden werden in der Versorgungsrealität überwiegend in spezialisierten Zentren angewendet. Insgesamt trägt das NUB-Verfahren dazu bei, dass Innovationen in einem sehr begrenzten Maß Zugang zur Refinanzierung im Rahmen des G-DGR Systems erhalten.

Suggested Citation

  • von Bandemer, Stephan & Merkel, Sebastian & Nimako-Doffour, Anna, 2012. "Medizinisch-technische Innovationen in der Gesundheitswirtschaft am Beispiel der Neuen Untersuchungs- und Behandlungsmethoden (NUB)," Forschung Aktuell 04/2012, Institut Arbeit und Technik (IAT), Westfälische Hochschule, University of Applied Sciences.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:iatfor:042012
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/57198/1/690187505.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Morgan, Steve & Grootendorst, Paul & Lexchin, Joel & Cunningham, Colleen & Greyson, Devon, 2011. "The cost of drug development: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 4-17, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. G. Kent Fellows & Daniel J. Dutton & Aidan Hollis, 2018. "Making Sure Orphan Drugs Don’t Get Left Behind," SPP Communique, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(6), August.
    2. Makai, Peter & Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Koopmanschap, Marc A. & Stolk, Elly A. & Nieboer, Anna P., 2014. "Quality of life instruments for economic evaluations in health and social care for older people: A systematic review," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 83-93.
    3. Pereira, Cristiano Gonçalves & Lavoie, Joao Ricardo & Garces, Edwin & Basso, Fernanda & Dabić, Marina & Porto, Geciane Silveira & Daim, Tugrul, 2019. "Forecasting of emerging therapeutic monoclonal antibodies patents based on a decision model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 185-199.
    4. Chen, Xu & Yang, Huan & Wang, Xiaojun, 2019. "Effects of price cap regulation on the pharmaceutical supply chain," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 281-290.
    5. Anita Chawla & Ginger Carls & Edmund Deng & Edward Tuttle, 2015. "The Expected Net Present Value of Developing Weight Management Drugs in the Context of Drug Safety Litigation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(7), pages 749-763, July.
    6. van Rijnsoever, Frank J. & Eveleens, Chris P., 2021. "Money Don't matter? How incubation experience affects start-up entrepreneurs' resource valuation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 106(C).
    7. Feng Xie, 2018. "Highly Priced Gene Therapies: A Wake-Up Call for Early Price Regulation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(8), pages 883-888, August.
    8. Marijn A. Weele & Frank J. Rijnsoever & Menno Groen & Ellen H. M. Moors, 2020. "Gimme shelter? Heterogeneous preferences for tangible and intangible resources when choosing an incubator," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(4), pages 984-1015, August.
    9. Vargas-Peláez, Claudia Marcela & Soares, Luciano & Rover, Marina Raijche Mattozo & Blatt, Carine Raquel & Mantel-Teeuwisse, Aukje & Rossi Buenaventura, Francisco Augusto & Restrepo, Luis Guillermo & L, 2017. "Towards a theoretical model on medicines as a health need," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 167-174.
    10. Hollis, Aidan & Ahmed, Ziana, 2014. "The path of least resistance: Paying for antibiotics in non-human uses," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(2), pages 264-270.
    11. Uwe Kehrel & Kai Klischan & Nathalie Sick, 2016. "Why Research Partnerships Fail in the Biotechnology Sector — An Empirical Analysis of Strategic Partnerships," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(01), pages 1-23, February.
    12. Charles Baum & Katherine Andino & Eric Wittbrodt & Shelley Stewart & Keith Szymanski & Robin Turpin, 2015. "The Challenges and Opportunities Associated with Reimbursement for Obesity Pharmacotherapy in the USA," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(7), pages 643-653, July.
    13. Wittmann, Nadine, 2014. "Economic reasoning on the correlation between life expectancy and economic development: Exploring alternative routes," Economics Discussion Papers 2014-43, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    14. Veronika Fenyves & Balazs Nyul & Krisztina Dajnoki & Zoltan Bacs & Gergo Tomori, 2019. "Profitability of Pharmaceutical Companies in the Visegrád Countries," Montenegrin Journal of Economics, Economic Laboratory for Transition Research (ELIT), vol. 15(4), pages 99-111.
    15. Tobias Basse & Christoph Schwarzbach & J.-Matthias Schulenburg, 2023. "Dividend policy issues in the European pharmaceutical industry: new empirical evidence," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(5), pages 803-816, July.
    16. Krisztian Buza & Ladislav Peška & Júlia Koller, 2020. "Modified linear regression predicts drug-target interactions accurately," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(4), pages 1-18, April.
    17. Ria Christine Siagian & Dumilah Ayuningtyas, 2019. "Gap analysis for drug development policy-making: An attempt to close the gap between policy and its implementation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-13, August.
    18. Volker Grossmann, 2021. "Medical Innovations and Ageing: A Health Economics Perspective," CESifo Working Paper Series 9387, CESifo.
    19. Graddy-Reed, Alexandra, 2020. "Getting ahead in the race for a cure: How nonprofits are financing biomedical R&D," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(8).
    20. Massimo Florio & Chiara Pancotti, 2022. "European pharmaceutical research and development. Could a public infrastructure overcome market failures?," Working Papers 202202, CSIL Centre for Industrial Studies.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:iatfor:042012. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iatgede.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.