A National Formulary for Canada

The University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Canadian Public Policy (Impact Factor: 0.38). 02/2004; 30(4):445-452. DOI: 10.2307/3552524
Source: RePEc


This article analyzes the benefits and costs of replacing Canada's ten different provincial formularies with one single national formulary. The 2002 Romanow Commission on the Future of Health Care in Canada recommended that Canada should have a National Drug Agency which would maintain a national formulary, replacing the existing provincial formularies which balkanize drug markets across Canada. This recommendation has been in part incorporated into the Common Drug Review in which the provinces (excluding Quebec) have agreed to undertake a single evaluation of all new drugs; provinces, however, retain their own formularies and decide which products to list. This balkanized approach to listing and insurance coverage of drugs substantially weakens the bargaining position of the provinces and leads to higher costs.

1 Follower
54 Reads
  • Source
    • "The province also requires that pharmaceutical companies sell formulary drugs at the lowest prices available throughout Canada. In one case, Quebec removed thirty-seven products from its formulary after the manufacturer was found to have sold one of its products at a lower price in the province of Saskatchewan (Hollis and Law 2004). These cost-containment policies have been offset, however, by Quebec's fifteen-year rule, according to which newly approved drugs are fully covered for fifteen years after being included in the formulary, even if the patent expires and a less expensive generic version becomes available in the interim. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In January 1997, the government of Quebec, Canada, implemented a public/private prescription drug program that covered the entire population of the province. Under this program, the public sector collaborates with private insurers to protect all Quebecers from the high cost of drugs. This article outlines the principal features and history of the Quebec plan and draws parallels between the factors that led to its emergence and those that led to the passage of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement and Modernization Act (MMA) in the United States. It also discusses the challenges and similarities of both programs and analyzes Quebec's ten years of experience to identify adjustments that may help U.S. policymakers optimize the MMA.
    Milbank Quarterly 10/2007; 85(3):469-98. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2007.00496.x · 3.38 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper describes and assesses pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement policies in Canada, considering them in the context of the broader policy and market environment in which they operate, and investigating their role in contributing to Canada’s achievements in meeting a range of objectives relating to the pharmaceutical policy. The federal government regulates prices of patented pharmaceutical products with the objective of protecting consumers against excessive prices. Regulation has very likely been responsible for bringing Canada’s prices for patented medicines roughly in line with European comparators. Prices of generic products, which are not regulated, are relatively high although high... Ce document décrit et évalue les politiques de prix et de remboursement des médicaments au Canada, en les situant dans le contexte politique et l’environnement de marché dans lesquels elles s’inscrivent ; et en observant leur rôle dans l’atteinte des objectifs relatifs à la politique pharmaceutique canadienne. Le gouvernement fédéral régule les prix des médicaments brevetés dans le but de protéger les consommateurs de prix excessifs. Cette régulation a très probablement eu pour effet d’amener les prix des médicaments brevetés canadiens au niveau des prix des pays européens auxquels le Canada se compare. Les prix des médicaments génériques, qui ne sont pas régulés, sont relativement élevés malgré une forte pénétration des...
    SSRN Electronic Journal 01/2006; DOI:10.2139/ssrn.1329308

  • American journal of law & medicine 02/2006; 32(2-3):193-217. · 1.44 Impact Factor
Show more

Similar Publications


54 Reads
Available from