Pharmaceutical cost control in primary care: opinion and contributions by healthcare professionals

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Strategies adopted by health administrations and directed towards drug cost control in primary care (PC) can, according to earlier studies, generate tension between health administrators and healthcare professionals. This study collects and analyzes the opinions of general practitioners (GPs) regarding current cost control measures as well as their proposals for improving the effectiveness of these measures.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A qualitative exploratory study was carried out using 11 focus groups composed of GPs from the Spanish regions of Aragon, Catalonia and the Balearic Islands. A semi-structured guide was applied in obtaining the GPs' opinions. The transcripts of the dialogues were analyzed by two investigators who independently considered categorical and thematic content. The results were supervised by other members of the team, with overall responsibility assigned to the team leader.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>GPs are conscious of their public responsibility with respect to pharmaceutical cost, but highlight the need to spread responsibility for cost control among the different actors of the health system. They insist on implementing measures to improve the quality of prescriptions, avoiding mere quantitative evaluations of prescription costs. They also suggest moving towards the self-management of the pharmaceutical budget by each health centre itself, as a means to design personalized incentives to improve their outcomes. These proposals need to be considered by the health administration in order to pre-empt the feelings of injustice, impotence, frustration and lack of motivation that currently exist among GPs as a result of the implemented measures.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Future investigations should be oriented toward strategies that involve GPs in the planning and management of drug cost control mechanisms. The proposals in this study may be considered by the health administration as a means to move toward the rational use of drugs while avoiding concerns about injustice and feelings of impotence on the part of the GPs, which can lead to lack of interest in and disaffection with the current measures.</p

La sostenibilidad del Sistema Nacional de Salud en España The sustainability of the Spanish National Health System

El Sistema Nacional de Salud (SNS) español presenta problemas de sostenibilidad derivados de deficiencias en su diseño institucional y de gobierno, agravadas por la crisis económica que padece. La crisis económica mundial ha tenido una repercusión especialmente virulenta en España, caracterizada por altos niveles de desempleo y de deuda pública y privada. Las políticas de ajuste fiscal emprendidas pueden deteriorar el SNS significativamente. Junto a problemas de financiación general, la fuerte descentralización territorial de competencias sanitarias en las Comunidades Autónomas no ha sido acompañada de un marco eficaz de coordinación sanitaria a nivel de Estado. El SNS adolece de problemas en sus reglas de gobierno, su sistema de financiación autonómica, las políticas de recursos humanos y la diversidad de formas de gestión directa e indirecta que funcionan en las distintas Comunidades Autónomas. Una estrategia de reformas en el gobierno de la sanidad española debe articularse en el marco de una revisión más amplia de las políticas públicas que permita estabilizar las líneas de defensa del Estado del Bienestar. En el ámbito del sector sanitario se debe mejorar su sistema de financiación y desarrollar cambios institucionales para aumentar la eficiencia.<br>The Spanish National Health System (SNHS) has sustainability problems resulting from weaknesses in institutional design and governance compounded by the economic crisis it faces. The global economic crisis has had a particularly virulent impact in Spain, characterized by high levels of unemployment and public and private debt. Fiscal adjustment policies implemented may significantly compromise the SNHS. Along with general funding problems, the strong territorial decentralization of health jurisdictions in the Autonomous Communities has not been backed up by efficient State-level health coordination. The SNHS suffers from problems in its rules of governance, its autonomous financing system, human resource policies and diversity of direct and indirect management models in different Autonomous Communities. A reform strategy in Spanish healthcare governancemust be articulated within the context of a broader review of public policies to stabilize the lines of defense of the welfare state. Within the scope of the health sector, the financing system must be improved and institutional changes to increase efficiency must be implemented

Head-to-head comparison between the EQ-5D-5L and the EQ-5D-3L in general population health surveys

Background: The EQ-5D has been frequently used in national health surveys. This study is a head-to-head comparison to assess how expanding the number of levels from three (EQ-5D-3L) to five in the new EQ-5D-5L version has improved its distribution, discriminatory power, and validity in the general population. Methods: A representative sample (N = 7554) from the Catalan Health Interview Survey 2011–2012, aged ≥18, answered both EQ-5D versions, and we evaluated the response redistribution and inconsistencies between them. To assess validity of this redistribution, we calculated the mean of the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), which measures perceived health. The discriminatory power was examined with Shannon Indices, calculated for each dimension separately. Spanish preference value sets were applied to obtain utility indices, examining their distribution with statistics of central tendency and dispersion. We estimated the proportion of individuals reporting the best health state in EQ-5D-5L and EQ-5D-3L within groups of specific chronic conditions and their VAS mean. Results: A very small reduction in the percentage of individuals with the best health state was observed, from 61.8% in EQ-5D-3L to 60.8% in EQ-5D-5L. In contrast, a large proportion of individuals reporting extreme problems in the 3 L version moved to severe problems (level 4) in the 5 L version, particularly for pain/discomfort (75.5%) and anxiety/depression (66.4%). The average proportion of inconsistencies was 0.9%. The pattern of the perceived health VAS mean confirmed the hypothesis established a priori, supporting the validity of the observed redistribution. Shannon index showed that absolute informativity was higher in the 5 L version for all dimensions. The means (SD) of the Spanish EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D-5L indices were 0.87 (0.25) and 0.89 (0.22). The proportion of individuals with the best health state within each specific chronic condition was very similar, regardless of the EQ-5D version (≤ 30% in half of the 28 chronic conditions). Conclusion: Although the proportion of individuals with the best possible health state is still very high, our findings support that the increase of levels provided by the EQ-5D-5L contributed to the validity and discriminatory power of this new version to measure health in general population, as in the national health surveys