卫生技术评价对慢性阻塞性肺疾病吸入式固定剂量联合三联疗法处方模式的影响。

Q2 Medicine
Jennifer Cook, Chloe Bloom, Jen Lewis, Zoe Marjenberg, Jaime Hernando Platz, Sue Langham
{"title":"卫生技术评价对慢性阻塞性肺疾病吸入式固定剂量联合三联疗法处方模式的影响。","authors":"Jennifer Cook,&nbsp;Chloe Bloom,&nbsp;Jen Lewis,&nbsp;Zoe Marjenberg,&nbsp;Jaime Hernando Platz,&nbsp;Sue Langham","doi":"10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Evidence suggests that triple therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is being used in a broader range of patients than recommended by guidelines, which may have health and cost implications. <b>Objective</b>: To explore the relationship between national health technology assessment (HTA) agency appraisals and market penetration of two fixed-dose combination (FDC) triple therapies. <b>Study design</b>: HTAs from Q3 2017 to Q1 2020 from 10 countries were evaluated. <b>Intervention</b>: Glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol fumarate/beclomethasone (Trimbow®) and umeclidinium/vilanterol/fluticasone furoate (Trelegy™ Ellipta®). <b>Main outcome measure</b>: HTA restrictions and prescribing rates (days of therapy). <b>Results</b>: Seven countries (70%) imposed restrictions on use including prescription only for patients stable on free-combination triple therapy or not controlled on dual therapy, requirement of a specialist prescription or therapeutic plan, prescription only for patients with severe COPD, and use as second-line therapy or later. In general, countries that have imposed restrictions on the use of FDC triple therapies have seen a lower than average uptake. <b>Conclusion</b>: Payer guidance on prescribing FDC triple therapy may potentially support more appropriate prescribing in line with clinical guidelines. It is important for payers to consider which restrictions would ensure the most efficient use of scarce resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":73811,"journal":{"name":"Journal of market access & health policy","volume":"9 1","pages":"1929757"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of health technology assessment on prescribing patterns of inhaled fixed-dose combination triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.\",\"authors\":\"Jennifer Cook,&nbsp;Chloe Bloom,&nbsp;Jen Lewis,&nbsp;Zoe Marjenberg,&nbsp;Jaime Hernando Platz,&nbsp;Sue Langham\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background</b>: Evidence suggests that triple therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is being used in a broader range of patients than recommended by guidelines, which may have health and cost implications. <b>Objective</b>: To explore the relationship between national health technology assessment (HTA) agency appraisals and market penetration of two fixed-dose combination (FDC) triple therapies. <b>Study design</b>: HTAs from Q3 2017 to Q1 2020 from 10 countries were evaluated. <b>Intervention</b>: Glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol fumarate/beclomethasone (Trimbow®) and umeclidinium/vilanterol/fluticasone furoate (Trelegy™ Ellipta®). <b>Main outcome measure</b>: HTA restrictions and prescribing rates (days of therapy). <b>Results</b>: Seven countries (70%) imposed restrictions on use including prescription only for patients stable on free-combination triple therapy or not controlled on dual therapy, requirement of a specialist prescription or therapeutic plan, prescription only for patients with severe COPD, and use as second-line therapy or later. In general, countries that have imposed restrictions on the use of FDC triple therapies have seen a lower than average uptake. <b>Conclusion</b>: Payer guidance on prescribing FDC triple therapy may potentially support more appropriate prescribing in line with clinical guidelines. It is important for payers to consider which restrictions would ensure the most efficient use of scarce resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of market access & health policy\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"1929757\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of market access & health policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of market access & health policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20016689.2021.1929757","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:有证据表明,慢性阻塞性肺疾病(COPD)患者的三联疗法的使用范围比指南推荐的范围更广,这可能会对健康和成本产生影响。目的:探讨国家卫生技术评价(HTA)机构评价与两种固定剂量联合(FDC)三联疗法市场渗透率的关系。研究设计:对2017年第三季度至2020年第一季度来自10个国家的hta进行评估。干预措施:溴化甘溴铵/富马酸福莫特罗/倍氯米松(Trimbow®)和乌克里地铵/维兰特罗/糠酸氟替卡松(Trelegy™Ellipta®)。主要结局指标:HTA限制和处方率(治疗天数)。结果:7个国家(70%)对该药物的使用施加了限制,包括仅对自由联合三联治疗稳定或双重治疗不受控制的患者开处方、要求专科处方或治疗计划、仅对严重COPD患者开处方、作为二线或以后治疗使用。一般来说,限制使用FDC三联疗法的国家的使用率低于平均水平。结论:支付者对FDC三联疗法处方的指导可能支持更符合临床指南的合理处方。付款人必须考虑哪些限制将确保最有效地利用稀缺资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Impact of health technology assessment on prescribing patterns of inhaled fixed-dose combination triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Impact of health technology assessment on prescribing patterns of inhaled fixed-dose combination triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Impact of health technology assessment on prescribing patterns of inhaled fixed-dose combination triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Impact of health technology assessment on prescribing patterns of inhaled fixed-dose combination triple therapy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Background: Evidence suggests that triple therapy for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is being used in a broader range of patients than recommended by guidelines, which may have health and cost implications. Objective: To explore the relationship between national health technology assessment (HTA) agency appraisals and market penetration of two fixed-dose combination (FDC) triple therapies. Study design: HTAs from Q3 2017 to Q1 2020 from 10 countries were evaluated. Intervention: Glycopyrronium bromide/formoterol fumarate/beclomethasone (Trimbow®) and umeclidinium/vilanterol/fluticasone furoate (Trelegy™ Ellipta®). Main outcome measure: HTA restrictions and prescribing rates (days of therapy). Results: Seven countries (70%) imposed restrictions on use including prescription only for patients stable on free-combination triple therapy or not controlled on dual therapy, requirement of a specialist prescription or therapeutic plan, prescription only for patients with severe COPD, and use as second-line therapy or later. In general, countries that have imposed restrictions on the use of FDC triple therapies have seen a lower than average uptake. Conclusion: Payer guidance on prescribing FDC triple therapy may potentially support more appropriate prescribing in line with clinical guidelines. It is important for payers to consider which restrictions would ensure the most efficient use of scarce resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信