corner
Healthy Skepticism
Join us to help reduce harm from misleading health information.
Increase font size   Decrease font size   Print-friendly view   Print
Register Log in

Healthy Skepticism Library item: 10293

Warning: This library includes all items relevant to health product marketing that we are aware of regardless of quality. Often we do not agree with all or part of the contents.

 

Publication type: Journal Article

Roughead EE, Lopert R, Sansom LN.
Prices for Innovative Pharmaceutical Products That Provide Health Gain: A Comparison Between Australia and the United States
Value in Health (OnlineEarly Articles). 2007 May 22; epub ahead of print
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00206.x


Abstract:

Objectives: Pricing polices used in many countries are often viewed in the United States as a mechanism of price constraint. Support for this contention has arisen from pricing studies which demonstrate that the United States pays higher prices for many pharmaceutical products. No study to date, however, has examined the prices paid for pharmaceuticals that provide significant health gain, which might be expected to be lower where price constraints were operating. This study aimed to examine prices paid by federal government programs and agencies in Australia and the United States for pharmaceutical products that provide significant health gain.

Methods: Products identified by the US Food and Drug Administration and the Canadian Patented Medicines Prices Review Board as likely to confer significant health gains between 1999 and 2004 were identified. Australian and USfederal government prices ($US) and US average manufacturer prices (AMP), which do not include discounts or rebates, during the second quarter of 2006 were compared.

Results: Of 22 products for which comparisons were possible, Australian prices were higher than the US Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) prices for 14 (64%) products. When compared with AMP, Australian prices were higher for eight of the 22 products. Overall, Australian prices were higher on average by 4.2% when compared with the FSS and lower by 14.4% when compared with the AMP.

Conclusion: These results suggest that Australian prices for medicines representing significant advances in therapy are similar to those paid under key US programs despite fundamental differences in policy contexts.

 

  Healthy Skepticism on RSS   Healthy Skepticism on Facebook   Healthy Skepticism on Twitter

Please
Click to Register

(read more)

then
Click to Log in
for free access to more features of this website.

Forgot your username or password?

You are invited to
apply for membership
of Healthy Skepticism,
if you support our aims.

Pay a subscription

Support our work with a donation

Buy Healthy Skepticism T Shirts


If there is something you don't like, please tell us. If you like our work, please tell others.

Email a Friend








Far too large a section of the treatment of disease is to-day controlled by the big manufacturing pharmacists, who have enslaved us in a plausible pseudo-science...
The blind faith which some men have in medicines illustrates too often the greatest of all human capacities - the capacity for self deception...
Some one will say, Is this all your science has to tell us? Is this the outcome of decades of good clinical work, of patient study of the disease, of anxious trial in such good faith of so many drugs? Give us back the childlike trust of the fathers in antimony and in the lancet rather than this cold nihilism. Not at all! Let us accept the truth, however unpleasant it may be, and with the death rate staring us in the face, let us not be deceived with vain fancies...
we need a stern, iconoclastic spirit which leads, not to nihilism, but to an active skepticism - not the passive skepticism, born of despair, but the active skepticism born of a knowledge that recognizes its limitations and knows full well that only in this attitude of mind can true progress be made.
- William Osler 1909