Patients’ Perception of Morocco’s Medicine Pricing Reform and Determinants of Their Access to Health Care and Medicine

Background. In 2014, the Ministry of Health of Morocco implemented a reform of medicine pricing that leads to lower prices. This reform has brought about a new method of pricing medicines and a reduction in the prices of more than 1,400 of the 5,000 medicines on the market. The objective of this study was to survey patients’ perceptions of the impact of the reform on medicine prices and affordability of health care, including medicine. Methods. Between September 2017 and September 2018, 360 patients that visited a community pharmacy in four selected areas of different socioeconomic levels were interviewed based on a questionnaire. Findings were studied through univariate and multivariate analyses. Results. Three hundred patients (83%) were included given their completed questionnaire. The majority (89%) of respondents considered medicine prices as a potential barrier to access to health care. Lower medicine prices following the reform were not perceived to have actually impacted respondents’ spending on health care. In some cases, care was delayed, in particular by lower-income respondents and people without insurance and health coverage. Conclusion. The majority of patients participating in the study did not perceive the decrease in medicine prices as sufficient. In addition, the study findings pointed to the relevance of further determinants of access to medicines, such as health insurance coverage. Patients think that the generalized third-party payment mode, which does not oblige patients to spend out of their pockets to have their treatment but rather their health insurance funds that will pay for them, provides optimal access to medicines.

Monitoring Cardiovascular Medicine Prices as a Tool for Analyzing the Effectiveness of Government Intervetions to Ensure Access to Medicines at the Regional Level

Aim. The aim of our study was to continue a comparative analysis of availability and access to cardiovascular medicines in 2017 and 2018 in the city of Kazan according to the original WHO/HAI methodology to assess the effectiveness of government interventions to ensure access to medicines.Material and methods. We performed a comparative analysis of prices of cardiovascular medicines in 2017 and 2018 in Kazan using the World Health Organization and Health Action International (WHO/HAI) methodology, to assess medicines' availability and affordability to ensure their rational use. We studied availability and prices of 71 cardiovascular medicines in public and private pharmacies in the city of Kazan and analyzed procurement prices of these medicines in hospitals. Also we studied the affordability of medicines, as well as performed pharmacoeconomic cost-minimization analysis for arterial hypertension pharmacotherapy in 2018. For each name, we studied the prices for the original brand and its lowest-priced generic. We compared medicine prices with international reference, delivered by the Management Sciences for Health and by expressing them as median price ratio (MPR).Results. In the public sector, prices of generic medicines were at the level of reference prices with the indicators of MPR 1.14 [0.41-1.84] and 1.17 [0.49-2.21], in 2017 and 2018 respectively. In the private sector, prices of generics reduced 2 times in 2018 compared to 2017, with the decrease in MPR from 2.22 [1.12-3.91] to 1.25 [0.44-2.32], (p<0.05). In the public sector, the affordability indicators of generics were the same in the studied years (Me=0.24 in 2017 and Me=0.26 in 2018). However, in the private sector there was a 2.5 times reduction in the affordability of generics (reduction Me from 0.66 to 0.24, p<0.05) in 2018 compared to 2017. From 2017 to 2018 the affordability of original brands changed from 1.9 to 1.3 in the public sector and from 2.3 to 1.5 in the private sector, but this change was not statistically significant (p>0.05). In 2018, depending on the choice of the medicine the annual course of therapy of hypertension varied from 149 to 28835 rubles.Conclusions. In 2018, the prices of generic cardiovascular medicines, but not of originator brands, reached the level of reference prices in both the public and private sectors of Kazan. According to the WHO/HAI methodology, generic cardiovascular medicines became affordable. In the private sector, there was a reduction in the prices of generic medicines, but not of originator brands, with an improvement of affordability of generics in 2018 compared to 2017.

Impact of changes in the methodology of external price referencing on medicine prices: discrete-event simulation

Background Several governments apply the policy of external price referencing (EPR), which considers the prices of a medicine in one or more other countries for the purpose of setting the price in the own country. Different methodological choices can be taken to design EPR. The study aimed to analyse whether, or not, and how changes in the methodology of EPR can impact medicine prices. Methods The real-life EPR methodology as of Q1/2015 was surveyed in all European Union Member States (where applicable), Iceland, Norway and Switzerland through a questionnaire responded by national pricing authorities. Different scenarios were developed related to the parameters of the EPR methodology. Discrete-event simulations of fictitious prices in the 28 countries of the study that had EPR were run over 10 years. The continuation of the real-life EPR methodology in the countries as surveyed in 2015, without any change, served as base case. Results In most scenarios, after 10 years, medicine prices in all or most surveyed countries were—sometimes considerably—lower than in the base case scenario. But in a few scenarios medicine prices increased in some countries. Consideration of discounts (an assumed 20% discount in five large economies and the mandatory discount in Germany, Greece and Ireland) and determining the reference price based on the lowest price in the country basket would result in higher price reductions (on average − 47.2% and − 34.2% compared to the base case). An adjustment of medicine price data of the reference countries by purchasing power parities would lead to higher prices in some more affluent countries (e.g. Switzerland, Norway) and lower prices in lower-income economies (Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland). Regular price revisions and changes in the basket of reference countries would also impact medicine prices, however to a lesser extent. Conclusions EPR has some potential for cost-containment. Medicine prices could be decreased if certain parameters of the EPR methodology were changed. If public payers aim to apply EPR to keep medicine prices at more affordable levels, they are encouraged to explore the cost-containment potential of this policy by taking appropriate methodological choices in the EPR design.

Impact of changes in the methodology of external price referencing on medicine prices: discrete-event simulation

Background: Several governments apply the policy of external price referencing (EPR), which considers the prices of a medicine in one or more other countries for the purpose of setting the price in the own country. Different methodological choices can be taken to design EPR. The study aimed to analyse whether, or not, and how changes in the methodology of EPR can impact medicine prices.Methods: The real-life EPR methodology as of Q1/2015 was surveyed in all European Union Member States (where applicable), Iceland, Norway and Switzerland through a questionnaire responded by national pricing authorities. Different scenarios were developed related to the parameters of the EPR methodology. Discrete-event simulations of fictitious prices in the 28 countries of the study that had EPR were run over 10 years. The continuation of the real-life EPR methodology in the countries as surveyed in 2015, without any change, served as base case.Results: In most scenarios, after ten years, medicine prices in all or most surveyed countries were – sometimes considerably – lower than in the base case scenario. But in a few scenarios medicine prices increased in some countries. Consideration of discounts (an assumed 20% discount in five large economies and the mandatory discount in Germany, Greece and Ireland) and determining the reference price based on the lowest price in the country basket would result in higher price reductions (on average -47.2% and -34.2% compared to the base case). An adjustment of medicine price data of the reference countries by purchasing power parities would lead to higher prices in some more affluent countries (e.g. Switzerland, Norway) and lower prices in lower-income economies (Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland). Regular price revisions and changes in the basket of reference countries would also impact medicine prices, however to a lesser extent.Conclusions: EPR has some potential for cost-containment. Medicine prices could be decreased if certain parameters of the EPR methodology were changed. If public payers aim to apply EPR to keep medicine prices at more affordable levels, they are encouraged to explore the cost-containment potential of this policy by taking appropriate methodological choices in the EPR design.

Medicine prices in 2017 and 2018 as a reflection of the effectiveness of government measures to ­ensure access to medicines

Aim. To conduct a comparative analysis of medicine prices in 2017 and 2018 years in Kazan (The Republic of Tatarstan, The Russian Federation) to assess the effectiveness of government measures to ensure the accessibility of medicines. Methods. We conducted a comparative analysis of medicine prices according to methodology developed by Health Action International and World Health Organization (WHO/HAI). The analysis included 30 medicines at a preselected dosage form. We studied the accessibility and prices of original brands and lowest priced generic of each medicine in the public and private pharmacies of Kazan in 2017 and 2018, and analyzed the procurement prices of the same medicines in inpatient hospitals. Medicine prices were compared with international reference prices (The Management Sciences for Health (MSH) reference prices) and expressed as median price ratio (MPR). Results. Prices for originator and generic medicines in the public and private sectors tended to decrease in 2018 compared to 2017, but statistically significant price reduction occurred only for generic medicines in the private sector. For example, the median price ratio for originator products changed from 6.86 to 2.97 in the public sector and from 11.1 to 5.36 in the private sector in 2018 compared to 2017, but the changes were not statistically significant (p 0.05). Prices for generics medicines in the public sector did not change in the studied years and remained at the level of international reference prices (the median price ratio were 1.3 in 2017 and 1.27 in 2018). In the private sector, we found a twofold decrease in the prices of generics medicines in 2018 compared to 2017 [the median price ratio decreased from 3.25 to 1.44 (p 0.05)]. Procurement prices for generics medicines in public hospitals in 2017 and 2018 years did not show statistically significant changes with the median price ratio equal to 1.34 and 0.8, respectively. Conclusion. Government price control measures of medicines contributed to maintaining the price of generic medicines at the reference prices level in the public sector and to halving the price of generic medicines in the private sector in 2018 compared to 2017.

Pharmaceutical pricing policy in Saudi Arabia: findings and implications

Introduction: Many countries have introduced policies and strategies to limit pharmaceutical expenditures. These include pharmaceutical pricing policies and related strategies to control medicine prices and to ensure appropriate and stable prices. The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the current pharmaceutical pricing policy for medicines in Saudi Arabia and to provide an evaluation of the impact of this policy on medicine prices. Methods: A description of the current pharmaceutical policy is presented by reviewing the current official documents and regulations related to pharmaceutical pricing in Saudi Arabia. A price comparison between the original brand medicines and their generic versions was conducted for the top six selling medicines in Saudi Arabia during the period of 2010–2015. Results: The findings showed that Saudi pharmaceutical pricing policy takes into consideration several factors including an international price benchmark, internal price referencing, and the price of the medicine in the country of origin when determining medicine prices. Based on this policy, there were large differences in the prices of generic medicines compared to original brand medicines. The generic medicine to original brand medicine price ratio was 0.87–0.30. However, the price of the first generic medicine was close to the price of original brand medicine, with the first generic medicine-to-original brand medicine price ratio was 0.87–0.81. In this study, there were large differences in the prices of generic medicines for the same molecule. In fact, price ratio among the generic medicines for the same molecule was between 0.96 and 0.18. However, some generic medicines imported from high income countries were cheaper than the medicines manufactured locally or manufactured in other countries in the Middle East. Conclusion: Medicine prices are strictly controlled through the pharmaceutical pricing policy in Saudi Arabia. Overall, the current policy has resulted in significant price differences among medicines, including medicines of the same molecule. Due to this large difference, the cost savings will depend on the product prescribed or procured by the health organization.

Impact of changes in the methodology of external price referencing on medicine prices: discrete-event simulation

Background: Several governments apply the policy of external price referencing (EPR), which considers the prices of a medicine in one or more other countries for the purpose of setting the price in the own country. Different methodological choices can be taken to design the EPR policy. The study aimed to analyse whether, or not, and how changes in the methodology of EPR can impact medicine prices.Methods: The real-life EPR methodology as of Q1/2015 was surveyed in all European Union Member States, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland through a questionnaire responded by national pricing authorities. Different scenarios were developed related to the parameters of the EPR methodology. Discrete-event simulations of fictitious prices in the 28 countries of the study that had EPR in place were run for a period of 10 years. The continuation of the real-life EPR methodology in the countries as surveyed in 2015, without any change, served as base case.Results: Consideration of discounts (an assumed 20% discount in five large economies and the mandatory discount in Germany, Greece and Ireland) and determining the reference price based on the lowest price in the country basket would result in higher price reductions (on average -47.2% and -34.2% compared to the base case). An adjustment of medicine price data of the reference countries by purchasing power parities would lead to higher prices in some more affluent countries (e.g. Switzerland, Norway) and lower prices in lower-income economies (Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Poland). Regular price revisions and changes in the basket of reference countries would also impact medicine prices, however to a lesser extent.Conclusions: EPR has some potential for cost-containment. Medicine prices could be decreased further if certain parameters of the EPR methodology were changed. If public payers aim to apply EPR to keep medicine prices at more affordable levels, they are encouraged to explore the cost-containment potential of this policy and to take appropriate methodological choices in the design of EPR.