A National Formulary for Canada

Canadian Public Policy (Impact Factor: 0.38). 02/2004; 30(4):445-452. DOI: 10.2307/3552524
Source: RePEc

ABSTRACT 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.

  • Source
    [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. · 5.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pharmaceuticals can be important for people's health. At the same time drugs are major components of health care costs. Pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies are used to determine or affect the prices that are paid for drugs. Examples are price controls, maximum prices, price negotiations, reference pricing, index pricing and volume-based pricing policies. The essence of reference pricing is to establish a maximum level of reimbursement for a group of drugs assumed to be therapeutically equivalent. To determine the effects of pharmaceutical pricing and purchasing policies on drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes and costs (expenditures). We searched the following databases and web sites: Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group Register (date of last search: 22/08/03), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (15/10/03), MEDLINE (07/09/05), EMBASE (07/09/05), ISI Web of Science (08/09/05), CSA Worldwide Political Science Abstracts (21/10/03), EconLit (23/10/03), SIGLE (12/11/03), INRUD (21/11/03), PAIS International (23/03/04), International Political Science Abstracts (09/01/04), NHS EED (20/02/04), PubMed (25/02/04), NTIS (03/03/04), IPA (22/04/04), OECD Publications & Documents (30/08/05), SourceOECD (30/08/05), World Bank Documents & Reports (30/08/05), World Bank e-Library (04/05/05), JOLIS (22/08/05), Global Jolis (22/08/05 and 23/08/05), WHOLIS (29/08/05). Policies in this review were defined as laws, rules, financial and administrative orders made by governments, non-government organisations or private insurers. To be included a study had to include an objective measure of at least one of the following outcomes: drug use, healthcare utilisation, health outcomes, and costs (expenditures); the study must be a randomised controlled trial, non-randomised controlled trial, interrupted time series analysis, repeated measures study or controlled before-after study of a pharmaceutical pricing or purchasing policy for a large jurisdiction or system of care. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study limitations. Quantitative analysis of time series data, for studies with sufficient data, and qualitative analyses were undertaken. We included 10 studies of reference pricing and one study of index pricing. Most of the reference pricing studies were for senior citizens in British Columbia, Canada. The use (dispensing) of reference drugs increased in five studies, between 60% and 196% immediately after introduction of reference drug pricing, whereas the use of cost sharing drugs decreased by between 19% and 42% in four studies. In three studies the reference drug group expenditures decreased (range 19% - 50%), whereas in the fourth study the expenditures increased by 5% in the short term. The results after six months of reference pricing do not show any clear pattern in relationship to the immediate effects. We found no evidence of adverse effects on health and no clear evidence of increased health care utilisation. For index pricing the evidence was much more limited than for reference drug pricing. A small reduction in drug prices was found. We found relatively few studies of pricing policies. The majority of the studies dealt with reference pricing. They had few methodological limitations. Based on the evidence in this review, mostly from senior citizens in British Columbia, Canada, reference drug pricing can reduce third party drug expenditures by inducing a shift in drug use towards less expensive drugs. We found no evidence of adverse effects on health and no clear evidence of increased health care utilisation. The analysis and reporting of the effects on patient drug expenditures were limited in the included studies and administration costs were not reported.
    Cochrane database of systematic reviews (Online) 02/2006; · 5.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Although the costs of doctors' visits and hospital stays in Canada are covered by national public health insurance, the cost of outpatient prescription drugs is not. To solve problems of access, Canadian provinces have introduced provincial prescription drug benefit programs. This study analyzes the prescription drug policymaking process in five Canadian provinces between 1992 and 2004 with a view to (1) determining the federal government's role in the area of prescription drugs; (2) describing the policymaking process; (3) identifying factors in each province's choice of a policy; (4) identifying patterns in those factors across the five provinces; and (5) assessing the federal government's influence on the policies chosen. Analysis shows that despite significant differences in policy choices, the ideological motivations of the provinces were unexpectedly similar. The findings also highlight the importance of institutional factors, for example, in provinces' decision to compete rather than to collaborate. We conclude that, to date, Canada's federalism laboratory has only partly benefited the Canadian public. Cost pressures may, however, eventually overcome barriers to cooperation between the provincial and the federal governments, enabling them to capitalize on Canada's federal structure to improve the accessibility and affordability of drugs.
    Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law 10/2010; 35(5):705-42. · 1.24 Impact Factor


Available from