Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.610915
Title: Reimbursement decisions for new medicines: exploration of the preferences of decision-makers and the public
Author: Linley, Warren G.
Awarding Body: Bangor University
Current Institution: Bangor University
Date of Award: 2013
Availability of Full Text:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Restricted access.
Please contact the current institution’s library for further details.
Abstract:
Aims: This thesis explores the preferences of different stakeholders, particularly nationallevel decision-makers and the public, to determine the relevance of current and proposed criteria and processes for medicines reimbursement in the UK National Health Service. Methods and Results: Based on a systematic literature review of health-related conjoint ! analyses (Chapter 2), process-related aspects of health care are demonstrated to be I ,important to stakeholders, albeit less so than health outcomes. Using revealed preference Imethods (Chapter 3) and a stated preference discrete choice experiment (Chapter 4), :members of a medicines appraisal committee are prepared to trade-off cost effectiveness ;and health gains against other factors when making national decisions on new medicines. The first comprehensive empirical analysis of public preferences towards UK medicines prioritisation criteria (Chapter 5), demonstrates that several current criteria (e .g. the end- 'of-life premium, the special funding status for treatments of rare diseases, the Cancer Drugs Fund in England) do not reflect public preferences for resource allocation, but support is evident for the proposed criteria for rewarding new medicines with higher prices under the value-based pricing system commencing in 2014. From a comparative review of its reports, there is a degree of alignment between the views of the Citizens Council of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) and the wider public [(Chapter 6), but evidence that it has influenced NICE decision-making processes is lacking. Conclusions: Using a range of methods, this thesis confirms that current medicines reimbursement processes are inadequate, and moves towards value-based pricing of medicines are supported. Non-health, process-related aspects of health care should be explicitly considered in decision-making. The involvement of patients and public as lstakeholders in medicines decision-making at all levels is supported. Efforts to idemonstrate fair decision-making processes do not obviate the need for incorporation of relevant social value judgements in decision-making. 7
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID: uk.bl.ethos.610915  DOI: Not available
Share: