No abstract

No abstract

Background The concept of health care innovation varies across organizations and countries. Harmonizing the definitions of innovation can augment the discovery of new therapies, minimize costs, and streamline drug development and approval processes. A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to gather insights surrounding different elements of innovation in the USA, the UK, France, Germany, and Japan. The SLR identified studies that have defined innovation and captured the types of incentives provided to promote innovation. Methods The MEDLINE, Embase, and EconLit databases were searched via the OVID SP platform on October 22, 2020. A secondary desk search literature review was performed to identify additional information of interest in regional languages: French, German, and Japanese. All the relevant literature in English was screened using the Linguamatics natural language processing (NLP) tool, except for articles from EconLit, which were screened manually using structured search strategies. Articles that describe a definition of innovation or refer to a definition of innovation published were included. All full-text articles were reviewed manually, and two reviewers independently screened the full texts for eligibility. Results After screening, 90 articles were considered to meet the SLR objectives. The most common dimension of innovation identified was therapeutic benefit as a measure of innovation, followed by newness and novelty aspects of innovations. Incentives around exclusivities were found to be the most prevalent in the data set, followed by rewards and premiums. Among the different therapy areas, the largest number of innovations was targeted at oncology. Conclusions This SLR highlights the lack of a unified definition of innovation among regulatory authorities and health technology assessment bodies in five countries, and variation in the types of incentives associated with innovation. The targeted countries cover different dimensions of definition and incentives of innovation at varying levels, with a few focused on specific therapy areas. Harmonization and consensus for innovation would be needed across countries because drug development is a global undertaking. This SLR envisages a more holistic approach to evaluation, wherein the value provided to patients and health systems is accounted for. The results of this SLR will help to promote broader discussion among different stakeholders and decision makers across countries to identify gaps in policies and develop sustainable strategies to promote innovation for pharmaceutical products. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40290-022-00457-5.

A267 year of 2006 and at 2012 to see if these states experienced an increase in transplants that may be attributable to the law. The 14 later adopting states and the four non-adopting states were analyzed in the same manner Results: The early adopting states experienced no statistically significant difference in the number of organ transplants between 2006 and 2012. This suggests that the 2006 UAGA has not achieved its goal of increasing the number of organ transplants. A brief discussion of reasons why this may be the case follows. ConClusions: Other methods of organ procurement must be considered, including those that would fundamentally change the U.S. system of voluntary donation.

No abstract