The EU-funded project Pharmaceutical Pricing and Reimbursement Information (PPRI) offers country specific information on pricing and reimbursement for numerous EU Member States and indicators for a comparative analysis. This article presents relevant pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement information in a comparative analysis for 28 countries and also a detailed description about the Spanish pricing and reimbursement system.

AimTo perform a comparative analysis of the pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement systems in Croatia and the 27 European Union (EU) Member States.MethodsKnowledge about the pharmaceutical systems in Croatia and the 27 EU Member States was acquired by literature review and primary research with stakeholders.ResultsPharmaceutical prices are controlled at all levels in Croatia, which is also the case in 21 EU Member States. Like many EU countries, Croatia also applies external price referencing, ie, compares prices with other countries. While the wholesale remuneration by a statutorily regulated linear mark-up is applied in Croatia and in several EU countries, the pharmacy compensation for dispensing reimbursable medicines in the form of a flat rate service fee in Croatia is rare among EU countries, which usually apply a linear or regressive pharmacy mark-up scheme. Like in most EU countries, the Croatian Social Insurance reimburses specific medicines at 100%, whereas patients are charged co-payments for other reimbursable medicines. Criteria for reimbursement include the medicine’s importance from the public health perspective, its therapeutic value, and relative effectiveness. In Croatia and in many EU Member States, reimbursement is based on a reference price system.ConclusionThe Croatian pharmaceutical system is similar to those in the EU Member States. Key policies, like external price referencing and reference price systems, which have increasingly been introduced in EU countries are also applied in Croatia and serve the same purpose: to ensure access to medicines while containing public pharmaceutical expenditure.

No abstract

ObjectivesTo analyze a sample of pharmaceutical waste drawn from household garbage in Vienna, with the aim to learn whether and which medicines end up unused in normal household waste.MethodsWe obtained a pharmaceutical waste sample from the Vienna Municipal Waste Department. This was drawn by their staff in a representative search in October and November 2009. We did a manual investigation of the sample which contained packs and loose blisters, excluded medical devices and traced loose blisters back to medicines packs. We reported information on the prescription status, origin, therapeutic group, dose form, contents and expiry date. We performed descriptive statistics for the total data set and for sub-groups (e.g. items still containing some of original content).ResultsIn total, 152 packs were identified, of which the majority was prescription-only medicines (74%). Cardiovascular medicines accounted for the highest share (24%). 87% of the packs were in oral form. 95% of the packs had not expired. 14.5% of the total data set contained contents but the range of content left in the packs varied. Results on the packs with contents differed from the total: the shares of Over-the Counter medicines (36%), of medicines of the respiratory system (18%) and of the musculo-skeletal system (18%), for dermal use (23%) and of expired medicines (19%) were higher compared to the full data set.ConclusionsThe study showed that some medicines end up unused or partially used in normal household garbage in Vienna. Our results did not confirm speculations about a high percentage of unused medicines improperly discarded. There is room for improved patient information and counseling to enhance medication adherence and a proper discharge of medicines.

No abstract