IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v109y2013i3p263-269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Structural changes in the German pharmaceutical market: Price setting mechanisms based on the early benefit evaluation

Author

Listed:
  • Henschke, Cornelia
  • Sundmacher, Leonie
  • Busse, Reinhard

Abstract

In the past, free price setting mechanisms in Germany led to high prices of patented pharmaceuticals and to increasing expenditures in the pharmaceutical sector. In order to control patented pharmaceutical prices and to curb increasing pharmaceutical spending, the Act for Restructuring the Pharmaceutical Market in Statutory Health Insurance (AMNOG) came into effect on 1st January 2011. In a structured dossier, pharmaceutical manufacturers have to demonstrate the additional therapeutic benefit of the newly approved pharmaceutical compared to its appropriate comparator. According to the level of additional benefit, pharmaceuticals will be subject to price negotiations between the Federal Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds and the pharmaceutical company concerned (or assigned to a reference price group in case of no additional benefit). Therefore, the health care reform is a first step to decision making based on “value for money”. The process of price setting based on early benefit evaluation has an impact on the German as well as the European pharmaceutical markets. Therefore, these structural changes in Germany are of importance for pricing decisions in many European countries both from a political point of view and for strategic planning for pharmaceutical manufacturers, which may have an effect on insured patients’ access to pharmaceuticals.

Suggested Citation

  • Henschke, Cornelia & Sundmacher, Leonie & Busse, Reinhard, 2013. "Structural changes in the German pharmaceutical market: Price setting mechanisms based on the early benefit evaluation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 263-269.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:109:y:2013:i:3:p:263-269
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851012003326
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2012.12.005?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    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. Mathias Kifmann & Sven Neelsen, 2010. "Germany's Struggle with Prices for Patent-protected Drugs," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 8(3), pages 43-52, October.
    2. Garattini, Livio & Cornago, Dante & De Compadri, Paola, 2007. "Pricing and reimbursement of in-patent drugs in seven European countries: A comparative analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 330-339, August.
    3. Drummond, Michael & Jonsson, Bengt & Rutten, Frans, 1997. "The role of economic evaluation in the pricing and reimbursement of medicines," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 199-215, June.
    4. John A. Vernon, 2005. "Examining the link between price regulation and pharmaceutical R&D investment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 1-16, January.
    5. Allan P. O. Williams, 2006. "Impact of Strategies," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: The Rise of Cass Business School, chapter 13, pages 167-181, Palgrave Macmillan.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Vogler, Sabine & Zimmermann, Nina & de Joncheere, Kees, 2016. "Policy interventions related to medicines: Survey of measures taken in European countries during 2010–2015," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(12), pages 1363-1377.
    2. Leopold, C. & Vogler, S. & Habl, C. & Mantel-Teeuwisse, A.K. & Espin, J., 2013. "Personalised medicine as a challenge for public pricing and reimbursement authorities – A survey among 27 European countries on the example of trastuzumab," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 113(3), pages 313-322.
    3. Christine Blome & Matthias Augustin & Hidayet Metin & David Lohrberg, 2017. "Four years of early benefit assessment of new drugs in Germany: a qualitative study on methodological requirements for quality of life data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(2), pages 181-193, March.
    4. Hörn, Helmut & Nink, Katrin & McGauran, Natalie & Wieseler, Beate, 2014. "Early benefit assessment of new drugs in Germany – Results from 2011 to 2012," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 147-153.
    5. Olberg, Britta & Perleth, Matthias & Busse, Reinhard, 2014. "The new regulation to investigate potentially beneficial diagnostic and therapeutic methods in Germany: Up to international standard?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(2), pages 135-145.
    6. Franziska Worm & Charalabos-Markos Dintsios, 2020. "Determinants of Orphan Drug Prices in Germany," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 397-411, April.
    7. Katharina E. Fischer & Tom Stargardt, 2014. "Early Benefit Assessment of Pharmaceuticals in Germany," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(8), pages 1030-1047, November.
    8. Fischer, Katharina Elisabeth & Heisser, Thomas & Stargardt, Tom, 2016. "Health benefit assessment of pharmaceuticals: An international comparison of decisions from Germany, England, Scotland and Australia," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(10), pages 1115-1122.
    9. Ulrike Theidel & J-Matthias Graf von der Schulenburg, 2016. "Benefit assessment in Germany: implications for price discounts," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Stephan Eger & Jörg Mahlich, 2014. "Pharmaceutical regulation in Europe and its impact on corporate R&D," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.

    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. Anke Richter, 2008. "Assessing the Impact of Global Price Interdependencies," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 649-659, August.
    2. Anthony Harris & Jing Jing Li & Karen Yong, 2016. "What Can We Expect from Value-Based Funding of Medicines? A Retrospective Study," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 393-402, April.
    3. Lockhart, Michelle & Babar, Zaheer Ud-Din & Garg, Sanjay, 2010. "Evaluation of policies to support drug development in New Zealand," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(2), pages 108-117, July.
    4. Stephan Eger & Jörg Mahlich, 2014. "Pharmaceutical regulation in Europe and its impact on corporate R&D," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    5. Zhang, Feng & Jiang, Guohua & Cantwell, John A., 2015. "Subsidiary exploration and the innovative performance of large multinational corporations," International Business Review, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 224-234.
    6. Onyema E. Ofoegbu, 2014. "The Role of Knowledge Management on Knowledge Management Perfomance: A Case Study of Some Nigerian Banks," Journal of Management and Strategy, Journal of Management and Strategy, Sciedu Press, vol. 5(2), pages 53-62, May.
    7. Marius Lux & Wolfgang Karl Hardle & Stefan Lessmann, 2020. "Data driven value-at-risk forecasting using a SVR-GARCH-KDE hybrid," Papers 2009.06910, arXiv.org.
    8. Monirosadat Hosseini & Seyyed Morteza Hashemi Toroujeni, 2017. "From Conventional to Technology-Assisted Alternative Assessment for Effective and Efficient Measurement: A Review of the Recent Trends in Comparability Studies," English Literature and Language Review, Academic Research Publishing Group, vol. 3(5), pages 35-45, 05-2017.
    9. Mihaela Păceşilă & Sofia Elena Colesca, 2020. "Insights on Social Responsibility of NGOS," Systemic Practice and Action Research, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 311-339, June.
    10. Cheatham, Leah P. & Randolph, Karen A. & Boltz, Laura D., 2020. "Youth with disabilities transitioning from foster care: Examining prevalence and predicting positive outcomes," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    11. Vincenzo Atella & Jay Bhattacharya & Lorenzo Carbonari, 2008. "Pharmaceutical Industry, Drug Quality and Regulation: Evidence from US and Italy," NBER Working Papers 14567, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Mumtaz Reina Mendonca, 2016. "Relating Big Five Factor Model to the Acceptance and Use of On-line Shopping," International Journal of Marketing Studies, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(3), pages 89-98, June.
    13. Agranov Agranov & Ahrash Dianat & Larry Samuelson & Leeat Yariv, 2021. "Paying to Match: Decentralized Markets with Information Frictions," Working Papers 273, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    14. Muhammad Irfan & Mohammad Farid Shamsudin & Noor Hadi, 2016. "How Important Is Customer Satisfaction? Quantitative Evidence from Mobile Telecommunication Market," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(6), pages 1-57, May.
    15. Marco Cucculelli, 2018. "Firm age and the probability of product innovation. Do CEO tenure and product tenure matter?," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 153-179, January.
    16. Håkonsen, Helle & Horn, Anne Marie & Toverud, Else-Lydia, 2009. "Price control as a strategy for pharmaceutical cost containment--What has been achieved in Norway in the period 1994-2004?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(2-3), pages 277-285, May.
    17. Patricia M. Danzon & Eric L. Keuffel, 2014. "Regulation of the Pharmaceutical-Biotechnology Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 407-484, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Begoña Garcia Mariñoso & Izabela Jelovac & Pau Olivella, 2011. "External referencing and pharmaceutical price negotiation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(6), pages 737-756, June.
    19. Nuño, Roberto & Coleman, Katie & Bengoa, Rafael & Sauto, Regina, 2012. "Integrated care for chronic conditions: The contribution of the ICCC Framework," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 55-64.
    20. Arief Anshory Yusuf, 2018. "The direct and indirect effect of cash transfers: the case of Indonesia," International Journal of Social Economics, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 45(5), pages 793-807, May.

    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:eee:hepoli:v:109:y:2013:i:3:p:263-269. 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: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    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.