Disease Management and Health Outcomes

, Volume 10, Issue 4, pp 229–232 | Cite as

The Emerging Role of the Consumer in Pharmaceutical Pricing Decisions

Current Opinion

Abstract

The absence of government regulation in the US has left pharmaceutical companies free to set their own prices based on a number of market considerations. Historically, these have included not only ingredient, research and development costs, but also advertising, the drug’s marginal effectiveness, competition, and market size. However, within the last two decades, two parallel trends have combined to bring a new consideration into the pricing decision: consumer price tolerance, or willingness to pay. The costs of prescriptions have increased markedly and patients have been increasingly organized into large groups based on insurance companies or defining characteristics such as the American Association of Retired Persons and AIDS groups. Consumers have found a voice for their concern over the high price of pharmaceuticals in these organizations, and together they have forged several avenues to effect price reductions. Consumer groups may apply indirect pressure by lobbying insurance companies to expand coverage or by invoking the threat of government regulation. Furthermore, direct pressure may be applied through letter-writing campaigns and public protests. Pharmaceutical companies are not only responding but also attempting to pre-empt these measures by eliciting consumer input in the early stages. This is being achieved through the creation of consumer advisory board positions and the conduct of willingness-to-pay analyses prior to bringing a drug to market.

Keywords

Zidovudine Finasteride Price Decision Public Protest Pharmaceutical Price 

References

  1. 1.
    Mullins CD, Thomas SK, Roffman DS. Pharmaceutical restrictions: possible effect on patient/physician buy-in of disease management programs. Dis Manage Health Outcomes 2001; 9 (2): 69–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Towse A. The UK pharmaceutical market: an overview. Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10 Suppl. 2: 14–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Henry DA. Australian national drug policy: using cost-effectiveness analysis to gain value for money [abstract]. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of International Society of Technology Assessment in Health; 1996 Jun 1; San Francisco, 19.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Tanouye E. US develops expensive habit with drug sector growth spurt. Wall Street Journal 1999 Nov 16; Sect. E (Suppl. A): 1.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    DiMasi JA. PAREXEL’s pharmaceutical R&D statistical sourcebook 2000. Waltham (MA): PAREXEL, 2000: 65.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Faloon B. The great American rip-off: high drug prices courtesy of the FDA. Life Extension Magazine 1999 Jun. Available from URL: http://www.lef.org/magazine/ [Accessed 2001 Jan 3].
  7. 7.
    Soumerai SB, Ross-Degnan D. Inadequate prescription-drug coverage for Medicare enrollees: a call to action. N Engl J Med 1999; 340 (9): 722–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    AARP Executive Director and CEO, William D Novelli’s statement regarding the President’s Medicare reform and prescription drug coverage principles, 2001 Jul 11. Available from URL: http://www.aarp.com/press/statements/ [Accessed 2001 Jul 24].
  9. 9.
    Gorman C, Thompson D, Weinstock CP. How much for a reprieve from AIDS?. Accused of overcharging for AZT, Burroughs Wellcome defends the cost of the drug but cuts its price 20%. Time Magazine 1989 Oct 2: 81.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    The costs of cures [editorial]. Wall Street Journal 1989 Oct 4; Sect. A: 30.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    How increased competition from generic drugs has affected prices and returns in the pharmaceutical industry. Congressional Budget Office 1998 Jul. Available at URL: http://www.cbo.gov/reports/html/ [Accessed 2000 Nov 15].
  12. 12.
    Fair Price Working Group. Fair Price Working Group: Sustiva and Aeveon. Letter to President of DuPont pharmaceuticals company from the Fair Price working group, 1998 Sep 16. Available at URL: http://AIDSinfonyc.org/network/simple/fair.html [Accessed 2001 Jan 2].
  13. 13.
    Kahn S. The other war on drugs: skyrocketing drug prices fuel new wave of activism, 1999 Mar. Available at URL: http://www.AIDSinfonyc.org/ [Accessed 1999 July 8].
  14. 14.
    Paulsen M. AZT: the bitterest pill. Detroit Metro Times 1993 Mar 31; 13 (26): 8–11.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lublin JS. Wellcome seeks approval to sell AZT to all those infected with AIDS virus. Wall Street Journal 1989 Nov 17; Sect. B: 4.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    International Association of Physicians in AIDS Care. Glaxo Wellcome announces price for anti-HIV drug Ziagen: expected to clear way for rapid acceptance by AIDS drug assistance programs. Available from URL: http://www.iapac.org/ [Accessed 1999 July 8].
  17. 17.
    Davey P, Grainger D, MacMillan J, et al. Economic evaluation of insulin lispro versus neutral (regular) insulin therapy using a willingness-to-pay approach. Pharmacoeconomics 1998; 13 (3): 347–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Pharmacy Practice, College of PharmacyMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA
  2. 2.Faculties of Pharmacy Practice, Biometry and Epidemiology, and Health Administration and PolicyMedical University of South CarolinaCharlestonUSA

Personalised recommendations