Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications

Daniel Resende Faleiros, Juliana Álvares, Alessandra Maciel Almeida, Vânia Eloisa de Araújo, Eli Iola Gurgel Andrade, Brian B. Godman, Francisco A. Acurcio, Augusto A. Guerra Júnior

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001 to 2015 on "budget impact analysis" with "drug" interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, with their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1984 studies, 92 were identified. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 6 or 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.
LanguageEnglish
Pages257-266
Number of pages10
JournalExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Volume16
Issue number2
Early online date17 Mar 2016
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2016

Fingerprint

Conflict of Interest
Budgets
Publications
Pharmaceutical Preparations

Keywords

  • budget impact analyses
  • drugs
  • medicines
  • systematic review

Cite this

Faleiros, D. R., Álvares, J., Almeida, A. M., de Araújo, V. E., Gurgel Andrade, E. I., Godman, B. B., ... Guerra Júnior, A. A. (2016). Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 16(2), 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958
Faleiros, Daniel Resende ; Álvares, Juliana ; Almeida, Alessandra Maciel ; de Araújo, Vânia Eloisa ; Gurgel Andrade, Eli Iola ; Godman, Brian B. ; Acurcio, Francisco A. ; Guerra Júnior, Augusto A. / Budget impact analysis of medicines : updated systematic review and implications. In: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2016 ; Vol. 16, No. 2. pp. 257-266.
@article{ea431d338b4049048b25af6852c2ea5d,
title = "Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications",
abstract = "This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001 to 2015 on {"}budget impact analysis{"} with {"}drug{"} interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, with their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1984 studies, 92 were identified. Of these, 95{\%} were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16{\%}) with a decline thereafter. 48{\%} met up to 6 or 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22{\%} stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.",
keywords = "budget impact analyses, drugs, medicines, systematic review",
author = "Faleiros, {Daniel Resende} and Juliana {\'A}lvares and Almeida, {Alessandra Maciel} and {de Ara{\'u}jo}, {V{\^a}nia Eloisa} and {Gurgel Andrade}, {Eli Iola} and Godman, {Brian B.} and Acurcio, {Francisco A.} and {Guerra J{\'u}nior}, {Augusto A.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "257--266",
journal = "Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research",
issn = "1473-7167",
number = "2",

}

Faleiros, DR, Álvares, J, Almeida, AM, de Araújo, VE, Gurgel Andrade, EI, Godman, BB, Acurcio, FA & Guerra Júnior, AA 2016, 'Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications' Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 257-266. https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958

Budget impact analysis of medicines : updated systematic review and implications. / Faleiros, Daniel Resende; Álvares, Juliana; Almeida, Alessandra Maciel; de Araújo, Vânia Eloisa; Gurgel Andrade, Eli Iola; Godman, Brian B.; Acurcio, Francisco A.; Guerra Júnior, Augusto A.

In: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Vol. 16, No. 2, 01.04.2016, p. 257-266.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Budget impact analysis of medicines

T2 - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

AU - Faleiros, Daniel Resende

AU - Álvares, Juliana

AU - Almeida, Alessandra Maciel

AU - de Araújo, Vânia Eloisa

AU - Gurgel Andrade, Eli Iola

AU - Godman, Brian B.

AU - Acurcio, Francisco A.

AU - Guerra Júnior, Augusto A.

PY - 2016/4/1

Y1 - 2016/4/1

N2 - This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001 to 2015 on "budget impact analysis" with "drug" interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, with their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1984 studies, 92 were identified. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 6 or 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.

AB - This evaluation determines whether published studies to date meet the key characteristics identified for budget impact analyses (BIA) for medicines, accomplished through a systematic review and assessment against identified key characteristics. Studies from 2001 to 2015 on "budget impact analysis" with "drug" interventions were assessed, selected based on their titles/abstracts and full texts, with their characteristics checked according to key criteria. Out of 1984 studies, 92 were identified. Of these, 95% were published in Europe and the USA. 2012 saw the largest number of publications (16%) with a decline thereafter. 48% met up to 6 or 7 out of the 9 key characteristics. Only 22% stated no conflict of interest. The results indicate low adherence to the key characteristics that should be considered for BIAs and strong conflict of interest. This is an issue since BIAs can be of fundamental importance in managing the entry of new medicines including reimbursement decisions.

KW - budget impact analyses

KW - drugs

KW - medicines

KW - systematic review

UR - http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ierp20#.VtQfReYTBC0

U2 - 10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958

DO - 10.1586/14737167.2016.1159958

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 257

EP - 266

JO - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

JF - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

SN - 1473-7167

IS - 2

ER -