Background: Rapid increasing pharmaceutical spending on the one hand and limited budgets on the other hand are problems confronting health expenditure. Policymakers have realized that without the negative effect on quality of care, they can control pharmaceutical spending. Methods: The study methodology involved a targeted review of the literature on cost containment policies, their implementation issues, advantages, and disadvantages. Then, all proposed strategies were investigated through interviewing insurance experts. Finally, these policies were prioritized with respect to their adherence to the main issues of performance. Results: Considering implementation costs, durability, and feasibility, six policy options have been proposed as follows: stopping non-prescription medicine reimbursement, using a tiered-coinsurance mechanism, establishing prescriptionguidelines, implementing cost-effectiveness-studies, employing scientific bargaining methods, and using different levels of reference pricing. Conclusions: Despite the possibility of some physicians' resistance, preparing prescription guidelines and their gradual enforcement is considered as the first choice. Next, it seems that reference pricing is the most feasible policy. It is in spite of some confusion and dissatisfaction, which might
Background The argument about funding criteria poses challenges for health decision-makers in all countries. This study aimed to investigate the public and decision-maker preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions in Iran. Methods A discrete choice experiment (DCE) was used for eliciting the preferences of the public and decision-makers. Four attributes including health gain after treatment, the severity of the disease, prevalence of the disease, and monthly out of pocket and relevant levels were designed in the form of hypothetical scenarios. The analysis was done by using conditional logit analysis. Results The results show all of four attributes are important for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions. But a medicine that improves health gain after treatment is more likely to be a choice in subsidy decisions (by relative importance of 28% for public and 42% for decision-makers). Out of pocket, severity, and prevalence of disease subsequently influence the preferences of the public and decision-makers, respectively. The greatest difference is observed in changing the health gain after treatment and out of pocket levels, between public and decision-makers. Conclusion This research reveals that the public is willing and able to provide preferences to inform policymakers for pharmaceutical decision-making; it also sets grounds for further studies.
Background: When an epidemic outspreads, the society engagement seems essential to make sure of the population’s preparedness for taking individual precautions. Objectives: The primary objective of this study was to examine public’s preventive behavioral responses to protective behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic to provide a description of conceptual frameworks for deeper understanding of these behaviors. Methods: A self-administrated questionnaire was used in this online survey through social networks during March 19th to 26th, 2020 (n = 2550). A Likert scoring scale was employed to investigate barriers and drivers affecting the participants’ preventive behaviors. Using personal protective equipment and good hand hygiene practices were identified as person-based measures. Social distancing and the restriction of social and economic activities during the past two months were determined as community-based measures. Univariate logistic regression and multiple - logistic regression were used to identify and assess influencing factors. Results: The study results indicated that 2426 (95.1%) of the participants intended to restrict their social and economic activities, and 1968 (72.2%), 1637 (64.2%), and 2492 (97.7%) persons intended to observe social distancing, use personal protective equipment, and have good hand hygiene, respectively. The most important barriers for preventive behaviors were the lack of risk perception, economic and financial barriers, lack of access, and cultural barriers, respectively. The perceived benefit was among the most significant driver. Intention for person-based measures was less affected by demographic and economic characteristics in comparison with community-based measures. Conclusions: Considering the substantial impact of preventive behaviors on managing COVID-19 epidemic, this study findings have remarkable implications for governments to manage future communications as well as interventions during this ongoing outbreak and subsequent national risk events.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.