Skip to main content

The use of pay-for-performance for drugs: Can it improve incentives for innovation?

  • Chapter
Incentives for Research, Development, and Innovation in Pharmaceuticals

Abstract

There has been a growth in interest in schemes that involve “paying for pills by results” (Pollock, 2007) i.e. “paying for performance” rather than merely “paying for pills”. Hard-pressed health care payers want to know that they are getting what they are paying for — health and other benefits for patients. Pharmaceutical companies are not prepared to accept prices that they think do not reflect the innovative value that their expensive R&D investments are bringing to patients, the health care system and the broader economy. Paying for outcomes delivered is a way of “squaring the circle”. Payers know they are getting value. Companies get a return that incentivises future innovation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Boggild M, Palace J, Barton P, Ben-Shlomo Y, Bregenzer T, Dobson C, et al. Multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme: two year results of clinical cohort study with historical comparator. BMJ. 2009; 339: 4677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlson JJ, Sullivan SD, Garrison LP, Neumann PJ, Veenstra DL. Linking payment to health outcomes: a taxonomy and examination of performance-based reimbursement schemes between healthcare payers and manufacturers. Health Policy. 2010;96(3):179–190.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cook JP, Vernon JA, Manning R. Pharmaceutical risk-sharing agreements. Pharmacoeconomics. 2008;26(7):551–556.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • de Pouvourville, G. “Risk-sharing agreements for innovative drugs: a new solution to old problems?” Eur J Health Econ. 2006; 7(3):155–157.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eckermann S, Willan AR. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ. 2007;16:195–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eckermann S, Willan AR. Globally optimal trial design for local decision making. Health Econ. 2009;18:203–216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lilford RJ. Response from chair of scientific advisory committee. BMJ. 2010;341:c3590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCabe C, Chilcott J, Claxton K, Tappenden P, Cooper C, Roberts J, et al. Continuing the multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme is unjustified. BMJ. 2010;340:1786.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moldrup C. No cure no pay. BMJ. 2005;330(7502):1262–1264.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pollock A. Pricing Pills by the Results. New York Times; 14th July 2007.

    Google Scholar 

  • Puig Peiró, R. Mestre-Ferrandiz J, Sussex J, Towse A. Literature review on Patient Access Schemes, Flexible Pricing Schemes and Risk Sharing Agreements for medicines. Podium presentation. ISPOR 14th Annual European Congress, Madrid, Spain: 5-8 November 2011. Available at: http://www.ispor.org/research_pdfs/39/pdffiles/RS1.pdf [Last accessed 28 November 2011]

    Google Scholar 

  • Raftery J. Multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme: a costly failure. BMJ. 2010; 40:1672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards RG. MS risk sharing scheme. Some clarification needed. BMJ. 2010;341:3589.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scolding N. The multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme. BMJ. 2010;340:2882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • SCRIP. NICE set to recommend Stelara for psoriasis. SCRIP World Pharmaceutical News. August 17th 2009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sendi PP, Briggs AH. Affordability and cost-effectiveness: decision-making on the cost-effectiveness plane. Health Econ. 2001;10:675–680.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Towse A. Value-based pricing, research and development, and patient access schemes. Will the United Kingdom get it right or wrong? Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010;70(3):360–366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Towse A, Garrison LP Jr. Can’t get no satisfaction? Will pay-for-performance help? Toward an economic framework for understanding performance-based risk-sharing agreements for innovative medical products. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28(2):93–102.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Williamson S. Patient access schemes for high-cost cancer medicines. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11(2):111–112.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wlodarczyk JH, Cleland LG, Keogh AM, McNeil KD, Perl K, Weintraub RG, et al. Public funding of bosentan for the treatment of pulmonary artery hypertension in Australia: cost effectiveness and risk sharing. Pharmacoeconomics. 2006;24(9):903–915.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Healthcare Ibérica SL.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Towse, A., Garrison, L., Puig-Peiró, R. (2011). The use of pay-for-performance for drugs: Can it improve incentives for innovation?. In: Incentives for Research, Development, and Innovation in Pharmaceuticals. Economía de la Salud y Gestión Sanitaria. Springer Healthcare, Madrid. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-84-938062-7-9_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-84-938062-7-9_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer Healthcare, Madrid

  • Print ISBN: 978-84-938062-1-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-84-938062-7-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics