Abstract
BackgroundThe argument about funding criteria poses challenges for health decision-makers in all countries. This study aimed to investigate the public and decision-maker preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions in Iran.MethodsA discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used for eliciting the preferences of the public and decision-makers. Four attributes including health gain after treatment, the severity of the disease, prevalence of the disease, and monthly out of pocket and relevant levels were designed in the form of hypothetical scenarios. The analysis was done by using conditional logit analysis.ResultsThe results show all of four attributes are important for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions. But a medicine that improves health gain after treatment is more likely to be a choice in subsidy decisions (by relative importance of 28% for public and 42% for decision-makers). Out of pocket, severity, and prevalence of disease subsequently influence the preferences of the public and decision-makers, respectively. The greatest difference is observed in changing the health gain after treatment and out of pocket levels, between public and decision-makers.ConclusionThis research reveals that the public is willing and able to provide preferences to inform policymakers for pharmaceutical decision-making; it also sets grounds for further studies.
Highlights
The argument about funding criteria poses challenges for health decision-makers in all countries
This study shows the potential of the discrete choice experiment (DCE) in identifying a method whereby can pharmaceutical suppliers introduce their products onto the market, and decision-makers can divert resources toward services with the most possible social benefit [1]
This research reveals that the public is willing and able to provide preferences to inform policymakers for pharmaceutical decision-making; it sets grounds for further studies
Summary
The argument about funding criteria poses challenges for health decision-makers in all countries. This study aimed to investigate the public and decision-maker preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions in Iran. The scarcity of resources and increasing health care expenditures have made apparent the need for prioritysetting and economic evaluation. In Iran, for the aim of cost-effectiveness, new pharmaceutical products are evaluated formally by Iran Food and Drug Administration (IFDA) assisted by its Economic and Drug Utilization Subcommittees. There are some rare diseases whose treatments face some hurdles to enter the market and to be put on insurance formularies. To support such patients, provide them with access to effective treatments, and decrease the catastrophic expenditures, the Islamic Republic of Iran’s (IRI)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
