IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v32y2014i5p509-520.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Comparative Analysis of Two Contrasting European Approaches for Rewarding the Value Added by Drugs for Cancer: England Versus France

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Drummond
  • Gerard Pouvourville
  • Elizabeth Jones
  • Jennifer Haig
  • Grece Saba
  • Hélène Cawston

Abstract

The two approaches produce very similar assessments of added value, but have different attributes in terms of cost, timeliness, transparency and political acceptability. How these considerations impact market access and prices is difficult to assess, because of the lack of transparency concerning prices in both countries and the fact that market access also depends on a broader range of factors. There is some evidence of convergence in the approaches, with the movement in France towards producing cost-effectiveness estimates and the movement in the UK towards negotiated prices. Copyright Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Drummond & Gerard Pouvourville & Elizabeth Jones & Jennifer Haig & Grece Saba & Hélène Cawston, 2014. "A Comparative Analysis of Two Contrasting European Approaches for Rewarding the Value Added by Drugs for Cancer: England Versus France," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 509-520, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:32:y:2014:i:5:p:509-520
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-014-0144-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40273-014-0144-z
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-014-0144-z?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. Cairns, John, 2006. "Providing guidance to the NHS: The Scottish Medicines Consortium and the National Institute for Clinical Excellence compared," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 134-143, April.
    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. Michael Drummond & Aleksandra Torbica & Rosanna Tarricone, 2020. "Should health technology assessment be more patient centric? If so, how?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(8), pages 1117-1120, November.
    2. Wasem, Jürgen & Weegen, Lennart & Bauer, Cosima & Walendzik, Anke & Grande, Frederic & May, Uwe, 2015. "Regulatorische Handhabung der selektiven Erstattung von Arzneimitteln in den ausgewählten Ländern England, Niederlande, Frankreich und Schweden," IBES Diskussionsbeiträge 211, University of Duisburg-Essen, Institute of Business and Economic Studie (IBES).
    3. B. Corbacho & M. Drummond & R. Santos & E. Jones & J. M. Borràs & J. Mestre-Ferrandiz & J. Espín & N. Henry & A. Prat, 2020. "Does the use of health technology assessment have an impact on the utilisation of health care resources? Evidence from two European countries," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(4), pages 621-634, June.
    4. Kleinhout-Vliek, Tineke & de Bont, Antoinette & Boer, Bert, 2017. "The bare necessities? A realist review of necessity argumentations used in health care coverage decisions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(7), pages 731-744.
    5. Elena Nicod, 2017. "Why do health technology assessment coverage recommendations for the same drugs differ across settings? Applying a mixed methods framework to systematically compare orphan drug decisions in four Europ," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(6), pages 715-730, July.
    6. Aleksandra Torbica & Rosanna Tarricone & Michael Drummond, 2018. "Does the approach to economic evaluation in health care depend on culture, values, and institutional context?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(6), pages 769-774, July.

    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. Michael Drummond & Bengt Jönsson & Frans Rutten & Tom Stargardt, 2011. "Reimbursement of pharmaceuticals: reference pricing versus health technology assessment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 12(3), pages 263-271, June.
    2. Morris, Zoë Slote & Clarkson, Peter John, 2009. "Does social marketing provide a framework for changing healthcare practice?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 135-141, July.
    3. Csanádi, Marcell & Ozierański, Piotr & Löblová, Olga & King, Lawrence & Kaló, Zoltán & Botz, Lajos, 2019. "Shedding light on the HTA consultancy market: Insights from Poland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(12), pages 1237-1243.
    4. Manish Barman & Narendra Kumar & Barman Palak, 2019. "Health Technology Assessments - Evidence Based Approach for A Sustainable Future of Healthcare," Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research, Biomedical Research Network+, LLC, vol. 20(3), pages 14966-14969, August.
    5. Anderson, Michael & Drummond, Michael & Taylor, David & McGuire, Alistair & Carter, Paul & Mossialos, Elias, 2022. "Promoting innovation while controlling cost: The UK's approach to health technology assessment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 224-233.
    6. 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.
    7. Fischer, Katharina E. & Leidl, Reiner & Rogowski, Wolf H., 2011. "A structured tool to analyse coverage decisions: Development and feasibility test in the field of cancer screening and prevention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 290-299, August.
    8. Michael A. Kozminski & Peter J. Neumann & Eric S. Nadler & Aleksandra Jankovic & Peter A. Ubel, 2011. "How Long and How Well," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(3), pages 380-385, May.
    9. Nicod, Elena & Kanavos, Panos, 2012. "Commonalities and differences in HTA outcomes: A comparative analysis of five countries and implications for coverage decisions," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(2), pages 167-177.
    10. Karimi, M. & Brazier, J. & Paisley, S., 2017. "How do individuals value health states? A qualitative investigation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 80-88.
    11. Carroll, Christopher & Kaltenthaler, Eva & FitzGerald, Patrick & Boland, Angela & Dickson, Rumona, 2011. "A thematic analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of manufacturers’ submissions to the NICE Single Technology Assessment (STA) process," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 136-144.

    More about this item

    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:spr:pharme:v:32:y:2014:i:5:p:509-520. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.