Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T17:22:27.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT OF MEDICINES IN GREECE: PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY EXECUTIVES' VIEWS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 May 2014

Eleni Armataki ,
Eleftheria Karampli ,
John Kyriopoulos  and
Elpida Pavi
Eleni Armataki
Affiliation:
Department of Health Economics, National School of Public Health, Athens, Greece
Eleftheria Karampli
Affiliation:
Department of Health Economics, National School of Public Health, Athens, Greece
John Kyriopoulos
Affiliation:
Department of Health Economics, National School of Public Health, Athens, Greece
Elpida Pavi
Affiliation:
Department of Health Economics, National School of Public Health, Athens, Greece
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate originator pharmaceutical companies’ practices in relation to health technology assessment (HTA) and the views and perceptions of their executives on the importance of HTA in pricing and reimbursement of medicines in Greece.

Methods: A qualitative study was performed, using individual semi-structured interviews based on an interview schedule with open-ended questions. The target population was market access departments’ executives of originator pharmaceutical companies. Our target sample consisted of sixteen executives, of whom ten agreed to participate. Saturation point was reached after eight interviews. Data were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis.

Results: Participants considered HTA as a very important complementary tool for decision making in health policy, particularly in the field of pharmaceuticals and medical devices. They believed that, in Greece, HTA could be institutionalized for the reimbursement mechanism of medicines under certain conditions relating to current health policy-making attitudes and conditions pertaining in the country. They considered that there are many constraints which must be overcome as well as opportunities to be exploited.

Conclusions: Decisions in pharmaceutical policy should be scientifically substantiated and HTA should be institutionalized primarily for reimbursement decisions. Development of guidelines for conducting pharmaco-economic evaluation, change in health policy goals, recording of cost and epidemiological data, and broader participation of all stakeholders in HTA decision-making processes are suggested as prerequisites for a successful implementation of HTA in Greece.

Keywords

Technology assessmentBiomedicalEconomicsPharmaceuticalHealth expendituresReimbursement mechanismsGreeceQualitative research
Type
Policies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 30 , Issue 2 , April 2014 , pp. 226 - 232
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. European Commission. The second economic adjustment programme for Greece. Third review [Internet]. Occasional papers 159. Brussels: European Commission Publishing; July 2013. http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/occasional_paper/2013/op159_en.htm (accessed November 2, 2013).Google Scholar
2. OECD/European Union. Health at a glance: Europe 2010. Paris: OECD Publishing; 2011. doi:10.1787/health_glance-2010-en.Google Scholar
3. Sivalal, S. History of health technology assessment: a commentary. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25 (Suppl 1):285–287.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Liaropoulos, L, Kaitelidou, D. Health technology assessment in Greece. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:429–448.Google Scholar
5. Fronsdal, K, Pichler, F, Mardhani-Bayne, L, et al. Interaction initiatives between regulatory, health technology assessment and coverage bodies, and industry. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28:374–381.Google Scholar
6. Australian Government. Review of health technology assessment in Australia [Internet]. Canberra (AU): Australian Government, Department of Health and Ageing; 2009. http://www.health.gov.au/internet/main/publishing.nsf/Content/AF68234CE9EB8A78CA257BF00018CBEB/$File/hta-review-report.pdf (accessed October 27, 2013).Google Scholar
7. Curtis, P, Gordon, C, Slaughter-Mason, S, Thielke, A. Washington State Health Technology Assessment Program: Stakeholder engagement project [Internet]. Portland (OR): Center for Evidence - Based Policy, Oregon Health & Science University; 2012. http://www.hca.wa.gov/hta/documents/stakeholder_engagement_project_report_final_part_two.pdf (accessed October 28, 2013).Google Scholar
8. European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA). EUnetHTA Work Package 8: Handbook on health technology assessment capacity building. Barcelona: Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Research. Catalan Health Service. Department of Health Autonomous Government of Catalonia; 2008.Google Scholar
9. Mack, N, Woodsong, C, MacQueen, KM, Guest, G, Namey, E. Qualitative research methods: A data collector's field guide [Internet]. Research Triangle Park, NC: Family Health International; 2005. Available from: http://pdf.usaid.gov/pdf_docs/PNADK310.pdf (accessed November 5, 2013).Google Scholar
10. Filias, V. Introduction to the methodology and techniques of social studies. Athens: Gutenberg Publishing; 2000.Google Scholar
11. PHIS/AIFA/GÖG. PHIS Glossary: Glossary for pharmaceutical policies/systems developed in the Pharmaceutical Health Information System (PHIS) Project. Vienna: WHO Collaborating Centre for Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Policies, July 2009 [updated April 2011]. https://phis.goeg.at/downloads/glossary/PHIS%20Glossary_UpdatedApril2011.pdf (accessed November 3, 2013).Google Scholar
12. Di Masi, JA, Hansen, RW, Grabowski, HG. The price of innovation. J Health Econ. 2003;22:151–185.Google Scholar
13. Maniadakis, N, Fragkoulakis, V. The role of pharmacoeconomics in a product's life cycle. In: Geitona M, ed. Economic evaluation of health technology. Pharmacoeconomics and decision making. Volos, Greece: University of Thessaly; 2004.Google Scholar
14. Taylor, RS, Drummond, MF, Salkeld, G, Sullivan, SD. Inclusion of cost effectiveness in licensing requirements of new drugs: the fourth hurdle. BMJ. 2004;329:972–975.Google Scholar
15. ICAP Group. Sector study – Pharmaceutical companies. Athens: ICAP Group Publishing; 2010.Google Scholar
16. Elo, S, Kyngäs, H. The qualitative content analysis process. J Adv Nurs. 2008;62:107–115.Google Scholar
17. Sorenson, C. The role of HTA in coverage and pricing decisions: A cross-country comparison. Eur Obs. 2009;11:1–4.Google Scholar
18. Lothgren, Μ, Ratcliffe, Μ. Pharmaceutical industry's perspective on health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:97–101.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19. Neumann, PJ, Saret, CJ. A survey of individuals in US-based pharmaceutical industry HEOR departments: Attitudes on policy topics. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2013;13:657–661.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Nielsen, CP, Lauritsen, SW, Kristensen, FB, et al. Involving stakeholders and developing a policy for stakeholder involvement in the European network for health technology assessment, EUnetHTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009; 25 (Suppl 2):84–91.Google Scholar
21. Sussex, J, Towse, A, Devlin, N. Operationalizing value-based pricing of medicines: a taxonomy of approaches. Pharmacoeconomics. 2013;31:1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
22. Henshall, C, Schuller, T. Health technology assessment, value-based decision making, and innovation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;11:1–7.Google Scholar
23. Contiades, X, Golna, C, Souliotis, K. Pharmaceutical regulation in Greece at the crossroad of change: economic, political and constitutional considerations for a new regulatory paradigm. Health Policy. 2007;82:116–129.Google Scholar
24. Sorenson, C, Drummold, M, Kanavos, P. Ensuring value for money in health care: The role of health technology assessment in the European Union. Observatory Studies Series No 11. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe; 2008. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/98291/E91271.pdf (accessed October 28, 2012).Google Scholar
25. Durczak, M, Kiersztyn, E, Orłowski, K, et al. Facilitation of National Strategies for Continuous Development and Sustainability of HTA. Analysis and recommendations. Warsaw: EUnetHTA; 2011. http://www.eunethta.eu/sites/5026.fedimbo.belgium.be/files/JA1%20output_Facilitation%20of%20National%20Strategies%20for%20continuous%20development%20and%20sustainability%20of%20HTA.pdf (accessed October 14, 2012).Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Armataki Supplementary Material

Supplementary Material

Download Armataki Supplementary Material(File)
File 33.8 KB