Abstract:The aim was to present and evaluate the impact of a comprehensive strategy over 10 years to select, communicate and achieve adherence to essential drug recommendations (EDR) in ambulatory care in a metropolitan healthcare region. EDRs were issued and launched as a 'Wise List' by the regional Drug and Therapeutics Committee in Stockholm. This study presents the concept by: (i) documenting the process for selecting, communicating and monitoring the impact of the 'Wise List'; (ii) analysing the variation in the number of drug substances recommended between 2000 and 2010; (iii) assessing the attitudes to the 'Wise List' among prescribers and the public; (iv) evaluating the adherence to recommendations between 2003 and 2009. The 'Wise List' consistently contained 200 drug substances for treating common diseases. The drugs were selected based on their efficacy, safety, suitability and cost-effectiveness. The 'Wise List' was known among one-third of a surveyed sample of the public in 2002 after initial marketing campaigns. All surveyed prescribers knew about the concept and 81% found the recommendations trustworthy in 2005. Adherence to recommendations increased from 69% in 1999 to 77% in 2009. In primary care, adherence increased from 83% to 87% from 2003 to 2009. The coefficient of variation (CV%) decreased from 6.1% to 3.8% for 156 healthcare centres between these years. The acceptance of the 'Wise List' in terms of trust among physicians and among the public and increased adherence may be explained by clear criteria for drug recommendations, a comprehensive communication strategy, electronic access to recommendations, continuous medical education and involvement of professional networks and patients.

This cross-national study has demonstrated considerable variation in the utilization and expenditure of PPIs and statins across Europe, providing opportunities to further improve prescribing efficiency. The '4 Es' do provide an understandable methodology to document and compare the influence of different demand-side measures, with the influence varying by their extent and intensity. Further reforms are essential given current financial pressures. Consequently, further research will concentrate on the potential to develop a scoring system to help predict the possible impact of different demand-side measures on future utilization patterns.

It is a continual challenge trying to improve the quality of prescribing while concurrently trying to address increasing pharmaceutical development, utilization and expenditure. National and regional reforms and initiatives in Sweden have moderated growth in ambulatory drug expenditure to 2.7% per annum in recent years despite increasing volumes. National reforms include mandatory generic substitution and value-based pricing alongside devolution of drug budgets to the regions. Regional initiatives include strengthening the role of the regional Drug and Therapeutic Committees, further budget devolution as well as strategies incorporating prescribing guidance and monitoring coupled with financial incentives. The extent and nature of the regional initiatives vary depending on their characteristics. In this article, we compare initiatives undertaken in two major counties, Stockholm and Ostergötland, and their outcomes. Outcomes include annual drug budget savings while achieving agreed quality as well as increased adherence to prescribing targets and guidance; the latter associated with savings. Appraising these multifaceted reforms can provide guidance to other countries and regions in view of their diversity. Future steps must incorporate measures to improve the utilization of new expensive drugs, which should include horizon scanning and forecasting activities as well as post-launch activities involving monitoring of prescribing and registries. This may well require cooperation with other European countries.

BackgroundThere has been an increase in 'risk sharing' schemes for pharmaceuticals between healthcare institutions and pharmaceutical companies in Europe in recent years as an additional approach to provide continued comprehensive and equitable healthcare. There is though confusion surrounding the terminology as well as concerns with existing schemes.MethodsAliterature review was undertaken to identify existing schemes supplemented with additional internal documents or web-based references known to the authors. This was combined with the extensive knowledge of health authority personnel from 14 different countries and locations involved with these schemes.Results and discussionA large number of 'risk sharing' schemes with pharmaceuticals are in existence incorporating both financial-based models and performance-based/outcomes-based models. In view of this, a new logical definition is proposed. This is "risk sharing' schemes should be considered as agreements concluded by payers and pharmaceutical companies to diminish the impact on payers' budgets for new and existing schemes brought about by uncertainty and/or the need to work within finite budgets". There are a number of concerns with existing schemes. These include potentially high administration costs, lack of transparency, conflicts of interest, and whether health authorities will end up funding an appreciable proportion of a new drug's development costs. In addition, there is a paucity of published evaluations of existing schemes with pharmaceuticals.ConclusionWe believe there are only a limited number of situations where 'risk sharing' schemes should be considered as well as factors that should be considered by payers in advance of implementation. This includes their objective, appropriateness, the availability of competent staff to fully evaluate proposed schemes as well as access to IT support. This also includes whether systematic evaluations have been built into proposed schemes.