Max: 300 words
TITLE: Comparison of the reimbursement decisions of pharmaceuticals in Hungary, Romania and Turkey
List of co-authors:
OBJECTIVES;
In countries with strong financial constraints healthcare decision-makers often restrict patient access to new medicines. In addition, manufacturers may delay lunch due to undesired nature of a market. We aimed to compare the reimbursed status of new pharmaceuticals in three selected countries.
METHODS;
Drugs that were registered in 2015 by European Medicines Agency were listed. We independently reviewed published national databases about drug reimbursement. In Hungary, the National Health Insurance Fund Administration publishes a regularly updated list of drugs that applied for reimbursement. In Romania, the process of access to innovative medicines is organized in 3 steps: first the drug is registered based on EMA procedure, second the dossier is filed at MoH for Romanian price, and finally, once the drug has a price, it can be sold, but not yet reimbursed by the public payers. In Turkey….
RESULTS;
82 registered products were reviewed in the national databases.[a] In Hungary, 17 of the reviewed products were on the public reimbursement list, 3 received negative reimbursement decisions and 10 are waiting for decision on their reimbursement application. In Romania, only 5 of the listed products are on the positive reimbursement list.[b][c] In Turkey 63, of the listed products are not on the reimbursement list and 19 received positive reimbursement decision .[d][e][f]
CONCLUSIONS
[a]merged those that had only different dosage
[b]Michaela and Dan, do you want to write something else about Romania?
[c]maybe you could write that how many of these have marketing authorization without reimbursement
[d]Kagan, do you want to write something else based on the rest of the data you have?
[e]Also please check whether I interpreted the data correctly
[f]Before we conclude we need to double check the data from Romania. It is extremely low number