Defining and Measuring the Affordability of New Medicines: A Systematic Review

  1. Antoñanzas, F. 3
  2. Terkola, R. 24
  3. Overton, P.M. 1
  4. Shalet, N. 5
  5. Postma, M. 444
  1. 1 Beacon Medical Communications, Brighton, United Kingdom
  2. 2 University of Florida
    info

    University of Florida

    Gainesville, Estados Unidos

    ROR https://ror.org/02y3ad647

  3. 3 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

  4. 4 University of Groningen
    info

    University of Groningen

    Groninga, Holanda

    ROR https://ror.org/012p63287

  5. 5 NAS Healthcare Solutions, Surbiton, United Kingdom
Journal:
PharmacoEconomics

ISSN: 1170-7690

Year of publication: 2017

Volume: 35

Issue: 8

Pages: 777-791

Type: Article

DOI: 10.1007/S40273-017-0514-4 SCOPUS: 2-s2.0-85018782613 WoS: WOS:000407396900004 GOOGLE SCHOLAR

More publications in: PharmacoEconomics

Metrics

Cited by

  • Scopus Cited by: 6 (07-05-2023)
  • Web of Science Cited by: 4 (19-05-2023)
  • Dimensions Cited by: 5 (30-03-2023)

JCR (Journal Impact Factor)

  • Year 2017
  • Journal Impact Factor: 4.011
  • Journal Impact Factor without self cites: 3.562
  • Article influence score: 1.217
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 13/94 (Ranking edition: SCIE)
  • Area: HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 6/79 (Ranking edition: SSCI)
  • Area: ECONOMICS Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 17/353 (Ranking edition: SSCI)
  • Area: PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 41/261 (Ranking edition: SCIE)

SCImago Journal Rank

  • Year 2017
  • SJR Journal Impact: 1.998
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: Health Policy Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 12/270
  • Area: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 23/582
  • Area: Pharmacology Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 25/337

CIRC

  • Social Sciences: A+

Scopus CiteScore

  • Year 2017
  • CiteScore of the Journal : 6.3
  • Area: Health Policy Percentile: 97
  • Area: Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health Percentile: 94
  • Area: Pharmacology Percentile: 78

Journal Citation Indicator (JCI)

  • Year 2017
  • Journal Citation Indicator (JCI): 1.55
  • Best Quartile: Q1
  • Area: HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 8/109
  • Area: PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 22/336
  • Area: ECONOMICS Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 65/534
  • Area: HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Quartile: Q1 Rank in area: 15/143

Dimensions

(Data updated as of 30-03-2023)
  • Total citations: 5
  • Recent citations: 2
  • Relative Citation Ratio (RCR): 0.3
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR): 1.4

Abstract

Background: In many healthcare systems, affordability concerns can lead to restrictions on the use of expensive efficacious therapies. However, there does not appear to be any consensus as to the terminology used to describe affordability, or the thresholds used to determine whether new drugs are affordable. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to investigate how affordability is defined and measured in healthcare. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE and EconLit databases (2005–July 2016) were searched using terms covering affordability and budget impact, combined with definitions, thresholds and restrictions, to identify articles describing a definition of affordability with respect to new medicines. Additional definitions were identified through citation searching, and through manual searches of European health technology assessment body websites. Results: In total, 27 definitions were included in the review. Of these, five definitions described affordability in terms of the value of a product; seven considered affordability within the context of healthcare system budgets; and 15 addressed whether products are affordable in a given country based on economic factors. However, there was little in the literature to indicate that the price of medicines is considered alongside both their value to individual patients and their budget impact at a population level. Conclusions: Current methods of assessing affordability in healthcare may be limited by their focus on budget impact. A more effective approach may involve a broader perspective than is currently described in the literature, to consider the long-term benefits of a therapy and cost savings elsewhere in the healthcare system, as well as cooperation between healthcare payers and the pharmaceutical industry to develop financing models that support sustainability as well as innovation. © 2017 Springer International Publishing Switzerland