Economic Analysis as an Aid to Subsidisation Decisions
Factors governing the entry of new drugs into clinical practice are changing, with increasing emphasis on economic issues. In future, organisations that subsidise the use of Pharmaceuticals are likely to require sponsors to provide evidence of the cost-effectiveness of their products. The first national government to signal such an intention is the Commonwealth Government of Australia, which from January 1993 will require economic analyses in support of applications for listing of new pharmaceutical products on its schedule of pharmaceutical benefits. This move is underpinned by legislation that requires the country’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) to consider costs and effectiveness when recommending listing of new drugs. The approach that has been recommended to the Committee is based on advice from a group of consultants, health economists and clinicians. The PBAC will use economic analyses as an aid to decision-making that will remain within a clinical framework; the viewpoint will be societal, and analyses will include costs that fall outside the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. The preferred approach is comparative cost-effectiveness analysis with a particular emphasis on the marginal costs of obtaining additional health benefits with new drugs, compared with existing therapies. The use of analyses that are restricted to potential cost savings with new drugs is discouraged, as is the inclusion of indirect costs and benefits. To facilitate the conduct of economic analyses, it is planned to hold meetings with specialist clinicians to obtain consensus on a range of intermediate clinical outcome indicators, and to publish lists of ‘standard’ Australian costs that will be updated regularly. The approach being followed in Australia has implications for both the government and the pharmaceutical industry. The responsibility for monitoring the effects of this new policy lie with the government. The success, or otherwise, of the policy should not be gauged simply by the effects on the price of new drugs which, historically, have been relatively low in Australia. A full evaluation will require that more effort be put into clinical outcomes research and the development of population databases, an area in which Australia lags behind other countries.
KeywordsEconomic Analysis Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme Draft Guideline Therapeutic Good Administration Australian Guideline
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Baume P. A question of balance: report on the future of drug evaluation in Australia. Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1991bGoogle Scholar
- Commonwealth of Australia. Draft guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Committee, including submissions involving economic analyses. Department of Health, Housing and Community Services, Canberra, 1990Google Scholar
- Drummond MF. Australian guidelines for cost-effectiveness analysis of Pharmaceuticals: the thin end of the boomerang? Centre for Health Economics, Discussion Paper 88, Centre for Health Economics, University of York, 1991Google Scholar
- Drummond MF, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford 1987Google Scholar
- Editorial. Single market — protecting health, promoting industry. SCRIP 1610: 6, 1991aGoogle Scholar
- Editorial. Australia must co-operate internationally. SCRIP 1636: 20, 1991bGoogle Scholar
- Evans D, Freund D, Dittus R, Robertson J, Henry D. The use of economic analysis as a basis for inclusion of pharmaceutical products on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Department of Health Housing and Community Services, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, 1990Google Scholar
- Mitchell A, Henry D. Potential for bias in economic analyses. New England Journal of Medicine 325: 1384, 1991Google Scholar
- Schedule of Pharmaceutical Benefits for medical practitioners. Department of Health, Housing and Community Services, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra, August 1991Google Scholar