首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Cancer drug funding decisions in Scotland: impact of new end-of-life, orphan and ultra-orphan processes
【24h】

Cancer drug funding decisions in Scotland: impact of new end-of-life, orphan and ultra-orphan processes

机译:苏格兰的癌症药物筹资决策:新的生命终结,孤儿和超孤儿过程的影响

获取原文
           

摘要

The Scottish Medicines Consortium evaluates new drugs for use in the National Health Service in Scotland. Reforms in 2014 to their evaluation process aimed to increase patient access to new drugs for end-of-life or rare conditions; the changes include additional steps in the process to gain further information from patients and clinicians, and for revised commercial agreements. This study examines the extent of any impact of the reforms on funding decisions. Data on the Scottish Medicines Consortium’s funding decisions during 24?months post-reform were extracted from published Advice, for descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Comparison data were extracted for the 24?months pre-reform. Data on decisions for England by the National Institute for Clinical and Health Excellence for the same drugs were extracted from published Technology Appraisals. The new process was used by 90% (53/59) of cancer submissions. It is triggered if the initial advice is not to recommend, and this risk-of-rejection level is higher than in the pre-period. Thirty-eight cancer drugs obtained some level of funding through the new process, but there was no significant difference in the distribution of decision types compared to the pre-reform period. Thematic analysis of patient and clinician input showed no clear relationship between issues raised and funding decision. Differences between SMC’s and NICE’s definitions of End-of-Life did not fully explain differences in funding decisions. The Scottish Medicines Consortium’s reforms have allowed funding of up to 38 cancer drugs that might previously have been rejected. However, the contribution of specific elements of the reforms to the final decision is unclear. The process could be improved by increased transparency in how the non-quantitative inputs influence decisions. Some disparities in funding decisions between England and Scotland are likely to remain despite recent process convergence.
机译:苏格兰医学协会评估用于苏格兰国家卫生局的新药。 2014年对其评估程序进行的改革旨在增加患者生命周期或罕见病期新药的获取;更改包括在过程中采取的其他步骤,以从患者和临床医生那里获得更多信息,以及修订商业协议。本研究考察了改革对供资决策的影响程度。苏格兰医学联合会在改革后24个月内的资助决策数据摘自已发表的《建议》,用于描述性统计和主题分析。提取了改革前24个月的比较数据。美国国家临床与卫生研究院关于相同药物的英格兰决策数据摘自已发表的技术评估报告。 90%(53/59)的癌症呈报者使用了新程序。如果不建议初始建议,则会触发此操作,并且此拒绝风险级别会比前期更高。 38种抗癌药物通过新流程获得了一定程度的资金投入,但是与改革前相比,决策类型的分布没有显着差异。对患者和临床医生的意见进行的专题分析表明,提出的问题与资助决策之间没有明确的关系。 SMC和NICE对报废的定义之间的差异并不能完全解释资金决定上的差异。苏格兰医药协会的改革已允许资助多达38种以前可能被拒绝的抗癌药物。但是,改革的具体内容对最终决定的贡献尚不清楚。可以通过增加非量化输入如何影响决策的透明度来改善该过程。尽管最近的流程趋同,但英格兰和苏格兰之间在资助决策方面仍存在一些差距。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号