IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v39y2021i1d10.1007_s40273-020-00974-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating New Zealanders’ Values for Drug Coverage Decision Making: Trade-Offs between Treatments for Rare and Common Conditions

Author

Listed:
  • Linda Yamoah

    (Pharmacy Intern
    University of Otago)

  • Nick Dragojlovic

    (University of British Columbia)

  • Alesha Smith

    (University of Otago)

  • Larry D. Lynd

    (University of British Columbia)

  • Carlo A. Marra

    (University of Otago)

Abstract

Background New Zealand’s near static healthcare budget limits access to expensive medications including those for rare conditions. As such, it is necessary to know the public’s priority for values in the drug funding decision-making process. Objectives The objectives of this study were to measure the relative societal importance of values of New Zealanders in informing drug funding decisions and to determine how New Zealanders trade off funding in various scenarios between common and rare diseases. Methods An online survey was conducted between 17 April and 17 May, 2019 on a sample of 500 New Zealanders aged ≥ 18 years. Participants ranked 13 values using an analytical hierarchy process. Participants were then presented with different trade-off scenarios to measure their attitudes towards funding drugs for common and rare diseases. Results The values ranked in the top five by most were potential effect on quality of life (71.8%), ability of the drug to work (57.6%), severity (57.6%), safety (57%), and potential to extend life (56%). Adherence and rarity held the lowest and second lowest ranking. Most believe that resources should be allocated towards drugs that have been proven to work and have the greatest health benefits. In trade-offs between access to an expensive drug therapy for a rare disease with uncertain benefits or receive a fixed cash payment, the overwhelming consensus was to receive the cash payment. Conclusions New Zealanders ultimately value drug-related factors (e.g. quality of life and efficacy) and disease-related factors (e.g. severity of disease and equity) the most but did not value disease rarity.

Suggested Citation

  • Linda Yamoah & Nick Dragojlovic & Alesha Smith & Larry D. Lynd & Carlo A. Marra, 2021. "Evaluating New Zealanders’ Values for Drug Coverage Decision Making: Trade-Offs between Treatments for Rare and Common Conditions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 109-119, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:39:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00974-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00974-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-020-00974-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-020-00974-8?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. Leopold, Christine & Morgan, Steven G. & Wagner, Anita K., 2017. "A rapidly changing global medicines environment: How adaptable are funding decision-making systems?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(6), pages 637-643.
    2. Green, Colin, 2009. "Investigating public preferences on 'severity of health' as a relevant condition for setting healthcare priorities," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2247-2255, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Blog mentions

    As found by EconAcademics.org, the blog aggregator for Economics research:
    1. Chris Sampson’s journal round-up for 18th January 2021
      by Chris Sampson in The Academic Health Economists' Blog on 2021-01-18 12:00:03

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Małgorzata Skweres-Kuchta & Iwona Czerska & Elżbieta Szaruga, 2023. "Literature Review on Health Emigration in Rare Diseases—A Machine Learning Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-31, January.

    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. Donna Rowen & John Brazier & Anju Keetharuth & Aki Tsuchiya & Clara Mukuria, 2016. "Comparison of Modes of Administration and Alternative Formats for Eliciting Societal Preferences for Burden of Illness," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 89-104, February.
    2. Donna Rowen & John Brazier & Clara Mukuria & Anju Keetharuth & Arne Risa Hole & Aki Tsuchiya & Sophie Whyte & Phil Shackley, 2016. "Eliciting Societal Preferences for Weighting QALYs for Burden of Illness and End of Life," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 36(2), pages 210-222, February.
    3. Shah, Koonal K., 2009. "Severity of illness and priority setting in healthcare: A review of the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 77-84, December.
    4. Liz Morrell & Sarah Wordsworth & Sian Rees & Richard Barker, 2017. "Does the Public Prefer Health Gain for Cancer Patients? A Systematic Review of Public Views on Cancer and its Characteristics," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(8), pages 793-804, August.
    5. Jeannette Winkelhage & Adele Diederich, 2012. "The Relevance of Personal Characteristics in Allocating Health Care Resources—Controversial Preferences of Laypersons with Different Educational Backgrounds," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Aki Tsuchiya, 2012. "Distributional Judgements in the Context of Economic Evaluation," Chapters, in: Andrew M. Jones (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Health Economics, Second Edition, chapter 38, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Gemma Lasseter & Hareth Al-Janabi & Caroline L Trotter & Fran E Carroll & Hannah Christensen, 2018. "The views of the general public on prioritising vaccination programmes against childhood diseases: A qualitative study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(6), pages 1-18, June.
    8. Gu, Yuanyuan & Lancsar, Emily & Ghijben, Peter & Butler, James RG & Donaldson, Cam, 2015. "Attributes and weights in health care priority setting: A systematic review of what counts and to what extent," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 41-52.
    9. Adele Diederich & Joffre Swait & Norman Wirsik, 2012. "Citizen Participation in Patient Prioritization Policy Decisions: An Empirical and Experimental Study on Patients' Characteristics," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(5), pages 1-10, May.
    10. Franken, Margreet & Stolk, Elly & Scharringhausen, Tessa & de Boer, Anthonius & Koopmanschap, Marc, 2015. "A comparative study of the role of disease severity in drug reimbursement decision making in four European countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 195-202.

    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:39:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s40273-020-00974-8. 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.