Background: New drugs including cancer drugs and orphan drugs are becoming increasingly more expensive. Risk sharing arrangements (RSAs) could manage the risk based on both financial impact and the health outcome of new drugs if reimbursed. To improve patients’ access to new drugs under uncertainties, many developed countries have adopted RSAs. In this study, we aimed to understand the effects of RSAs in South Korea on patients’ access.Methods: We reviewed current status of RSA drugs in South Korea. The number of appraisals and time gap between market approval and reimbursement per RSA drug were considered to quantify improvement of patients’ access as they showed how rapidly decisions on reimbursement of RSA drugs were derived. Then, we applied a comparative analysis to determine whether the RSA drugs in South Korea were reimbursed in the UK, Italy, and Australia. Most data for this study were obtained from websites of the governmental department/agencies responsible for appraisal of drug reimbursement in each country. And literatures related to RSAs were investigated as well.Results: The eligibility for Korean RSAs had two key components - drugs for cancer and rare diseases and not having other alternative treatments. As of the first half of 2019, there were 39 RSA drugs reimbursed in South Korea, the majority of which were financial-based schemes. Refund and expenditure cap were the representative types (89.7%). After introduction of RSAs, the time gap and number of appraisals were decreased. Based on the indications of RSA drugs, the level of drug coverage in South Korea was found lower than Italy, similar to the UK, and higher than Australia.Conclusions: RSAs in South Korea significantly enhanced patients’ access to new drugs and led to the alleviation of patients’ out-of-pocket expenses. The drug coverage of South Korea had a level comparable to that of other countries. This study provides implications for countries that have a dual mission of containing pharmaceutical expenditure and improving access to new drugs.

Rehabilitation using digital healthcare (DHC) has the potential to enhance the effectiveness of treatment for musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) and associated pain by improving patient outcomes, while being cost-effective, safe, and measurable. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of musculoskeletal rehabilitation using DHC. We searched PubMed, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, and PEDro Physiotherapy Evidence Database from inception to October 28, 2022 for controlled clinical trials comparing DHC to conventional rehabilitation. We used a random-effects model for the meta-analysis, pooling the effects of DHC on pain and quality of life (QoL) by calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between DHC rehabilitation and conventional rehabilitation (control). Fifty-four studies with 6240 participants met the inclusion criteria. The sample size ranged from 26 to 461, and the average age of the participants ranged from 21.9 to 71.8 years. The majority of the included studies focused on knee or hip joint MSD (n = 23), and the most frequently utilized DHC interventions were mobile applications (n = 26) and virtual or augmented reality (n = 16). Our meta-analysis of pain (n = 45) revealed that pain reduction was greater in DHC rehabilitation than in conventional rehabilitation (SMD: −0.55, 95% CI: −0.74, −0.36), indicating that rehabilitation using DHC has the potential to ameliorate MSD pain. Furthermore, DHC significantly improved health-related QoL and disease-specific QoL (SMD: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.29, 1.03; SMD: −0.44, 95% CI: −0.87, −0.01) compared to conventional rehabilitation. Our findings suggest that DHC offers a practical and flexible rehabilitation alternative for both patients with MSD and healthcare professionals. Nevertheless, further researches are needed to elucidate the underlying mechanisms by which DHC affects patient-reported outcomes, which may vary depending on the type and design of the DHC intervention.

Background: New drugs including cancer drugs and orphan drugs are becoming increasingly more expensive. Risk sharing arrangements (RSAs) could manage the risk based on both financial impact and the health outcome of new drugs if reimbursed. To improve patients’ access to new drugs under uncertainties, many developed countries have adopted RSAs. In this study, we aimed to understand the effects of RSAs in South Korea on patients’ access.Methods: We reviewed current status of RSA drugs in South Korea. The number of appraisals and time gap between market approval and reimbursement per RSA drug were considered to quantify improvement of patients’ access as they showed how rapidly decisions on reimbursement of RSA drugs were derived. Then, we applied a comparative analysis to determine whether the RSA drugs in South Korea were reimbursed in the UK, Italy, and Australia. Most data for this study were obtained from websites of the governmental department/agencies responsible for appraisal of drug reimbursement in each country. And literatures related to RSAs were investigated as well.Results: The eligibility for Korean RSAs had two key components - drugs for cancer and rare diseases and not having other alternative treatments. As of the first half of 2019, there were 39 RSA drugs reimbursed in South Korea, the majority of which were financial-based schemes. Refund and expenditure cap were the representative types (89.7%). After introduction of RSAs, the time gap and number of appraisals were decreased. Based on the indications of RSA drugs, the level of drug coverage in South Korea was found lower than Italy, similar to the UK, and higher than Australia.Conclusions: RSAs in South Korea significantly enhanced patients’ access to new drugs and led to the alleviation of patients’ out-of-pocket expenses. The drug coverage of South Korea had a level comparable to that of other countries. This study provides implications for countries that have a dual mission of containing pharmaceutical expenditure and improving access to new drugs.