Current State and Challenges of Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation in Korea

우리나라 의약품 경제성평가의 현황과 과제

  • Published : 2008.03.31

Abstract

Since the positive listing system for prescription drug reimbursement has been introduced in Korea, the number of pharmacoeconomic evaluation studies has increased. However it is not clear if the quality of pharmacoeconomic evaluation study has improved. Due to the lack of randomized clinical studies in Korean health care setting, Korean economic evaluation studies have typically integrated the local cost data and foreign clinical data. Therefore methodological issues can be raised in regard to data coherence and consistency. But the quality of data was not questiened and the potential bias has not been investigated yet. Even though changes in policy have encouraged the undertaking of pharmacoeconomic evaluations, there is few public-side funding for validation study of cost-effectiveness models and data. Several companies perform economic evaluation studies to be submitted on behalf of their own products, but do not want the study results to be disclosed to the academic community or public. To improve the present conduct of pharmacoeconomic evaluations in Korea, various funding sources need to be developed, and, like other multidisciplinary areas, the experts in different fields of study should collaborate to ensure the validity and credibility of pharmacoeconomic evaluations.

Keywords

References

  1. Choi SE, Sullivan S. Review of economic evaluation studies for drug reimbursement decision. Korean J Health Policy Admin 2005;15(4):1-25. (Korean)
  2. Gagnon JP, Rindress D, Smith MD. Advisory Panel Chairs. Pharmacoeconomics: Identifying the issues Advisory Panel Reports. Princeton: International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, 1998. [cited 2008 Feb 20] Available from URL:http://www.ispor. org/ workpaper/adpanel/apr.pdf
  3. Garrison LP Jr, Neumann PJ, Erickson P, Marshall D, Mullins CD. Using real-world data for coverage and payment decisions: The ISPOR Real-World Data Task Force report. Value Health 2007; 10(5): 326-335 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4733.2007.00186.x
  4. Neumann PJ. Using Cost-effectiveness Analysis to Improve Health Care: Opportunities and Barriers. New York: Oxford University Press; 2005. p118-119
  5. Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996
  6. Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation. New York: Oxford University Press; 2006. p. 126-130
  7. Kim JY, Kim BO, Kang DH, Bae HJ, Kim HC, Kim MS, et al. Construction of National Surveillance System for Cardiovascular & Cerebrovascular Diseases. Seoul: Health Insurance Review & Assessment Service; 2006. (Korean)
  8. Raftery J, Roderick P, Stevens A. Potential use of routine databases in health technology assessment. Health Technol Assess 2005; 9(20): 1-106