Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T22:24:46.208Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

OP93 Conditional Financing In Health Technology Assessment Practice: The Dutch Experience

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 January 2018

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
INTRODUCTION:

In 2007, the National Healthcare Institute (ZIN) initiated conditional financing (CF) of expensive hospital drugs as an example of conditional reimbursement schemes (CRS). CF is a 4-year procedure encompassing initial HTA assessment (T = 0) followed by additional data collection via outcomes research (separately assessing appropriate use & cost-effectiveness in routine practice) and re-assessment (T = 4). This study aims to review performance and experiences with CF in the Netherlands to date.

METHODS:

All dossiers for drugs that underwent the full CF procedure were reviewed. Using a standardized data abstraction form, two researchers independently extracted information on procedural, methodological and decision-making aspects (that is, related to implemented outcomes research, evidence assessment and appraisal). A scoring algorithm was used to assess all three aspects.

RESULTS:

Fourty-seven candidates were nominated for CF; fourty-four underwent T = 0 assessments and eleven T = 4 assessments. The procedure extended beyond 4 years for 10/11 candidates. For the eleven candidates, applicants clearly defined study designs and data collection methods for outcomes research proposals addressing 16/22 research questions posed in T = 0 reports. ZIN provided discussion points and recommendations regarding research proposals for 18/22 research questions. Applicants implemented recommendations fully in 8/22 cases and partially in 12/22. Sufficient data was available at T = 4 to answer 15/22 research questions posed at T = 0. However, discussion points remained regarding implemented outcomes research for all eleven candidates at T = 4. ZIN advised to continue reimbursement for nine candidates and to stop reimbursement for two. For six of the nine candidates, reimbursement was continued on the basis of conditions relating to additional evidence generation beyond T = 4.

CONCLUSIONS:

Theoretically, CF provides a valuable option for enabling quick but conditional access to medicines in the Netherlands. However, procedural, methodological and decision-making considerations related to scheme design and implementation may affect its value in decision-making practice.

Type
Oral Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018