Early benefit assessment (EBA) in Germany: analysing decisions 18 months after introducing the new AMNOG legislation

Downloadstatistik des Dokuments (Auswertung nach COUNTER):

Ruof, Joerg; Schwartz, Friedrich Wilhelm; Schulenburg, J. -Matthias; Dintsios, Charalabos-Markos: Early benefit assessment (EBA) in Germany: analysing decisions 18 months after introducing the new AMNOG legislation. In: European Journal of Health Economics 2014 (2014), S. 577-589. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-013-0495-y

Version im Repositorium

Zum Zitieren der Version im Repositorium verwenden Sie bitte diesen DOI: https://doi.org/10.15488/1791

Zeitraum, für den die Download-Zahlen angezeigt werden:

Jahr: 
Monat: 

Summe der Downloads: 225




Kleine Vorschau
Zusammenfassung: 
Since the introduction of the German health care reform in January 2011, an early benefit assessment (EBA) is required for all new medicines. Pharmaceutical manufacturers have to submit a benefit dossier for evaluation by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG). A final decision is made by the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA). The aim of this investigation was to analyse the outcomes 18 months after introduction of the new legislation and to identify critical areas requiring further discussion and development. All EBAs commenced prior to June 2012 were included. The G-BA website was used to obtain manufacturers' benefit dossiers, IQWiG assessments, and G-BA decisions. Four areas of interest were analysed: levels of additional benefit, appropriate comparative therapy (ACT), patient-relevant endpoints, and adverse events. Twenty-seven EBAs were analysed. IQWiG stated a benefit in 50 % of EBAs, whereas G-BA stated a benefit in 63 %, but only in 50 % of identified subgroups and 40 % of patients involved. In 12 EBAs, the ACT suggested by G-BA differed from the comparator used in phase III trials. The G-BA reported no benefits on health-related quality of life. Discrepancies arose in morbidity outcomes such as 'progression-free survival' and 'sustained virological response'. Categorisation and balancing of adverse events was conducted within various assessments. Considerable variance was observed in the levels of additional benefit reported by pharmaceutical manufacturers, IQWiG and G-BA. The areas of disagreement included ACT selection, definition of subgroups and patient-relevant endpoints, and classification and balancing of adverse events.
Lizenzbestimmungen: CC BY 4.0 Unported
Publikationstyp: Article
Publikationsstatus: publishedVersion
Erstveröffentlichung: 2014
Die Publikation erscheint in Sammlung(en):Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät

Verteilung der Downloads über den gewählten Zeitraum:

Herkunft der Downloads nach Ländern:

Pos. Land Downloads
Anzahl Proz.
1 image of flag of Germany Germany 142 63,11%
2 image of flag of United States United States 29 12,89%
3 image of flag of Russian Federation Russian Federation 9 4,00%
4 image of flag of China China 5 2,22%
5 image of flag of Israel Israel 4 1,78%
6 image of flag of Honduras Honduras 4 1,78%
7 image of flag of Ireland Ireland 3 1,33%
8 image of flag of Czech Republic Czech Republic 3 1,33%
9 image of flag of Switzerland Switzerland 2 0,89%
10 image of flag of Canada Canada 2 0,89%
    andere 22 9,78%

Weitere Download-Zahlen und Ranglisten:


Hinweis

Zur Erhebung der Downloadstatistiken kommen entsprechend dem „COUNTER Code of Practice for e-Resources“ international anerkannte Regeln und Normen zur Anwendung. COUNTER ist eine internationale Non-Profit-Organisation, in der Bibliotheksverbände, Datenbankanbieter und Verlage gemeinsam an Standards zur Erhebung, Speicherung und Verarbeitung von Nutzungsdaten elektronischer Ressourcen arbeiten, welche so Objektivität und Vergleichbarkeit gewährleisten sollen. Es werden hierbei ausschließlich Zugriffe auf die entsprechenden Volltexte ausgewertet, keine Aufrufe der Website an sich.