Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAllen, Nicola
dc.contributor.authorWalker, Stuart R
dc.contributor.authorLiberti, Lawrence
dc.contributor.authorSehgal, Chander
dc.contributor.authorSalek, M Sam
dc.date.accessioned2019-08-20T12:31:46Z
dc.date.available2019-08-20T12:31:46Z
dc.date.issued2016-12-27
dc.identifier.citationAllen , N , Walker , S R , Liberti , L , Sehgal , C & Salek , M S 2016 , ' Evaluating alignment between Canadian Common Drug Review reimbursement recommendations and provincial drug plan listing decisions : an exploratory study ' , CMAJ Open , vol. 4 , no. 4 , pp. E674-E678 . https://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20160006
dc.identifier.issn2291-0026
dc.identifier.otherPURE: 14843347
dc.identifier.otherPURE UUID: 93ee1157-4b9a-46af-9cf9-b7bac997e30e
dc.identifier.otherPubMed: 28018881
dc.identifier.otherPubMedCentral: PMC5173476
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2299/21604
dc.descriptionCopyright 2016, Joule Inc. or its licensors
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The CADTH Common Drug Review was established in 2002 to prepare national health technology assessment reports to guide listing decisions for 18 participating drug plans. The aim of this study was to compare the nonmandatory recommendations from the Common Drug Review in Canada with the listing decisions of provincial payers to determine alignment. METHODS: We identified the recommendations issued by the Common Drug Review from Jan. 1, 2009, to Jan. 1, 2015, and compared these with the listing decisions of 3 provincial public payers (Alberta, British Columbia and Ontario) that participate in the Common Drug Review and the recommendations from Quebec. RESULTS: We identified 174 medicine-indication pairs in CADTH Common Drug Review reports issued from Jan. 1, 2009, to Jan. 1, 2015; 110 of these met the inclusion criterion. Among the 110 medicine-indication pairs, listing decisions were available for 95 in Alberta, 102 in Quebec, 104 in Ontario and 106 in BC. There was moderate to substantial agreement between provincial listing decisions and Common Drug Review recommendations: 74.5% (κ = 0.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.64) for Quebec, 78.8% (κ = 0.56, 95% CI 0.41-0.72) for Ontario, 78.9% (κ = 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.74) for Alberta and 81.1% (κ = 0.62, 95% CI 0.47-0.77) for BC. INTERPRETATION: Our study showed moderate to substantial agreement between Common Drug Review recommendations and provincial listing decisions. Future studies can build on this research by evaluating the concordance between Common Drug Review recommendations and listing decisions of all participating federal, provincial and territorial drug plans.en
dc.language.isoeng
dc.relation.ispartofCMAJ Open
dc.rightsOpen
dc.titleEvaluating alignment between Canadian Common Drug Review reimbursement recommendations and provincial drug plan listing decisions : an exploratory studyen
dc.contributor.institutionCentre for Health Services and Clinical Research
dc.contributor.institutionPublic Health and Patient Safety Unit
dc.contributor.institutionDepartment of Pharmacy, Pharmacology and Postgraduate Medicine
dc.contributor.institutionSchool of Life and Medical Sciences
dc.description.statusPeer reviewed
dc.identifier.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5173476/
dc.relation.schoolSchool of Life and Medical Sciences
dc.description.versiontypeFinal Published version
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-12-27
rioxxterms.versionVoR
rioxxterms.versionofrecordhttps://doi.org/10.9778/cmajo.20160006
rioxxterms.licenseref.uriOther
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Review
herts.preservation.rarelyaccessedtrue
herts.rights.accesstypeOpen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record