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: 9137

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

Schoffski O.
Consequences of implementing a drug budget for office-based physicians in Germany.
Pharmacoeconomics 1996; 10:


Abstract:

For many years, drug prices in Germany were the highest in Europe and the level of regulation of the pharmaceutical industry was lower than in other states. This situation has, however, changed radically in recent years. Pharmaceutical prices have been regulated, without the introduction of direct price controls, through a combination of pressures exerted by the authorities and the German sickness funds, which are responsible for reimbursement. The process of price restriction began in 1984 with the imposition of a negative pharmaceuticals list, which was further extended in 1989. A reference pricing system was also introduced in 1989, and a drug budget for office-based physicians in 1993. An overview of these measures is provided in the first section of this article. This is followed by a report of a study of the impact of Germany’s global pharmaceutical budgets for office-based general practitioners and internists.

 

  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








Cases of wilful misrepresentation are a rarity in medical advertising. For every advertisement in which nonexistent doctors are called on to testify or deliberately irrelevant references are bunched up in [fine print], you will find a hundred or more whose greatest offenses are unquestioning enthusiasm and the skill to communicate it.

The best defence the physician can muster against this kind of advertising is a healthy skepticism and a willingness, not always apparent in the past, to do his homework. He must cultivate a flair for spotting the logical loophole, the invalid clinical trial, the unreliable or meaningless testimonial, the unneeded improvement and the unlikely claim. Above all, he must develop greater resistance to the lure of the fashionable and the new.
- Pierre R. Garai (advertising executive) 1963