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 journalArticlepeer-review

29 Citations (Scopus)
890 Downloads (Pure)


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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)257-266
Number of pages10
JournalExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Issue number2
Early online date17 Mar 2016
Publication statusPublished - 1 Apr 2016


  • budget impact analyses
  • drugs
  • medicines
  • systematic review


Dive into the research topics of 'Budget impact analysis of medicines: updated systematic review and implications'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this