Multifaceted national and regional drug reforms and initiatives in ambulatory care in Sweden: global relevance

References

• Bergström G, Karlberg I. Decentralized responsibility for costs of outpatient prescription pharmaceuticals in Sweden Assessment of models for decentralized financing of subsidies from a management perspective. Health Policy81, 358–367 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Glenngård AH, Hjalte F, Svensson M, Anell A, Bankauskaite V. Health systems in transition. WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. Copenhagen, Sweden (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Anell A. Swedish healthcare under pressure. Health Econ.14, S237–S254 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garattini S, Bertele V, Godman B, Haycox A, Wettermark B, Gustafsson LL. Enhancing the rational use of new medicines across European healthcare systems – a position paper. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol.64, 1137–1138 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee T, Emanuel E. Tier 4 drugs and the fraying of the social compact. N. Engl. J. Med.359, 333–335 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett A, Roques T, Small M, Smith R. How much will herceptin really cost? BMJ333, 1118–1120 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Askling J, Fored CM, Geborek P et al. Swedish registers to examine drug safety and clinical issues in RA. Ann. Rheum. Dis.65, 707–712 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Drews J. Drug discovery – a historical perspective. Science287, 1960–1964 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Evans WA, Relling MV. Moving towards individualized medicine with pharmacogenomics. Nature429, 464–468 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choudhry NK, Stelfox HD, Detsky AS. Relationships between authors of clinical practice guidelines and the pharmaceutical industry. JAMA287, 612–617 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Angel. Industry-sponsored clinical research. JAMA300, 1069–1071 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Relman A. Industry support of medical education. JAMA300, 1071–1073 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Moynihan R. Doctors’ education: the invisible influence of drug company sponsorship. BMJ336, 416–417 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Lenzer J, Brownlee S. Is there an (unbiased) doctor in the house? BMJ337, 206–208 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Gerdtham UG, Lundin D. Why did drug spending increase during the 1990s? A decomposition based on Swedish data. Pharmacoeconomics22, 29–42 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lundkvist J. Pricing and reimbursement of drugs in Sweden. Eur. J. Health Economics3, 66–70 (2002).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Anell A, Persson U. Reimbursement and clinical guidelines for pharmaceuticals in Sweden: do health-economic evaluations support decision making? Eur. J. Health Economics50, 274–279 (2005).
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. OECD Health data. OECD, CREDES Paris (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Wettermark B, Godman B, Andersson K et al. Recent national and regional drug reforms in Sweden – implications for pharmaceutical companies in Europe. Pharmacoeconomics26, 537–550 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sturm H, Austvoll-Dahlgren A, Aaserud M et al. Pharmaceutical policies: effects of financial incentives for prescribers. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev.3. Art No.: CD006731 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Carlsson P. Prognosticering av Offentliga Utgifter för Läkemedelsförmånen. Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Carlson P. Resolving Health Care’s Difficult Choices. Survey of Priority Setting in Sweden and Analysis of Principles and Guidelines on Priorities in Health Care. National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care Report 2. ISSN 1650–8475 (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Andersson A, Petzold M, Allebeck P, Carlsten A. Influence of mandatory generic substitution on pharmaceutical sales patterns: a national study over five years. BMC Health Serv. Res. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6963-8-50 (Epub) (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Andersson K, Sonesson C, Petzold M et al. What are the obstacles to generic substitution? An assessment of the behaviour of prescribers, patients and pharmacies during the first year of generic substitution in Sweden. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf.14, 341–348 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson K, Jorgensen T, Carlsten A. Physicians’ opinions and experiences of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Reform. Scand. J. Public Health34, 654–659 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Socialstyrelsen. [Patientsäkerhet vid utbyte av läkemedel på apotek]. Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Patient safety and generic substitution. Stockholm, Sweden, Artikelnr: 2004-103-14 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Jonsson M, Amnefelt M, Frisk P. Customers’ Opinions on Generic Substitution – a Swedish Pharmacy Survey. Poster presented at FIP meeting, Basel, Switzerland (2008).
   Google Scholar
• Astrand B, Hovstadius B, Antonov K, Petersson G. The Swedish national pharmacy register. Stud. Health Technol. Inform.129, 345–349 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Public Communication Campaigns (3rd Edition). Rice RE, Atkin CK (Eds). SAGE Publications Inc., London, UK (2001).
   Google Scholar
• Sjöqvist F, Bergman U, Dahl ML et al. Drug and Therapeutics Committees: a Swedish Experience. WHO Drug Information16, 207–213 (2002)
   Google Scholar
• Andersson K. Swedish Pharmaceutical Benefit Reforms – Analyses of Implementation, Pharmaceutical Sales Patterns and Expenditures. ISBN: 91-628-6875-6 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Grol R, Grimshaw J. From best evidence to best practice: effective implementation of change in patient’s care. Lancet362, 1225–1230 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schiotz M, Merkur S. Health quality information in Sweden. Euro Observer9, 5–7 (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Jansson S, Anell A. The impact of decentralised drug-budgets in Sweden – a survey of physicians’ attitudes towards costs and cost–effectiveness. Health Policy76, 299–311 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Granlund D, Rudholm N, Wikström M. Fixed budgets as a cost containment measure for pharmaceuticals. Eur. J. Health Economics7, 37–45 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wettermark B, Nyman K, Bergman U. Five years’ experience of quality assurance and feedback with individual prescribing profiles at a primary healthcare centre in Stockholm, Sweden. Qual. Prim. Care12, 225–234 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson M, Bastholm P, Forsberg P et al. Janus computerised prescribing system provides pharmacological knowledge at point of care – design, development and proof of concept. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol.62, 251–258 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wettermark B, Tomson G, Bergman U. Kvalitetsindikatorer för läkemedel – läget i Sverige idag. [Quality indicators for drug prescribing – the situation in Sweden] Läkartidningen103, 3607–3611 (2006).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wettermark B. Drug Utilization 90% – Using Aggregate Drug Statistics for the Quality Assessment of Prescribing. ISBN: 91-7140-048-6 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Wettermark B, Pehrsson A, Jinnerot D, Bergman U. Drug utilisation 90% profiles – a useful tool for quality assessment of prescribing in primary health care in Stockholm. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf.12, 499–510 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almkvist H, Bergman U, Edlert M et al. Kvalitetsbokslut minskade läkemedelskostnaderna i primärvården – Stockholms läns landstings modell för decentraliserat kostnadsansvar i primärvården. [Quality review decreased costs for drugs in primary health care – the model in Stockholm County for decentralized responsibility for drug costs] Läkartidningen105, 2930–2934 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wettermark B, Hammar N, Fored M et al. The new Swedish Prescribed Drug Register – Opportunities for pharmacoepidemiological research and experience from the first six months. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf.16, 726–735 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wettermark B, Persson A, von Euler M. Secondary prevention in a large stroke population – a study of patients’ purchase of recommended drugs. Stroke39, 2880–2885 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Data on file. Specialist and non-specialist pharmaceutical sales in Stockholm 1997 to 2007. Stockholm County Council.
   Google Scholar
• Gustafsson LL, Almkvist H, Hjemdahl P et al. Modell för strukturerad introduktion av nya läkemedel: syftet är att erbjuda alla patienter ändamålsenlig behandling. [Model for structured introduction of new drugs: the aim is to offer all patients adequate treatment] Läkartidningen105, 2917–2922 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Rogers EM. Diffusion of Innovations. 4th Edition. Free Press, NY, USA (1995).
   Google Scholar
• IRIS – Introduction of Rimonabant in Stockholm. Project Plan 2007–2004–2003. Stockholm County Council. Stockholm, Sweden (2007).
   Google Scholar
• Wettermark B, Raaschou P, Forslund T, Hjemdahl P. Fortsatta frågetecken kring bantningsmedlet Acomplia. [Still questions around the slimming agent rimobant. No approval in USA due to the risk of mental adverse effects] Läkartidningen104, 3879–3881 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bero LA, Grilli R, Grimshaw JM et al. Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ317, 465–468 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chapman S, Durieux P, Walley T. Good Prescribing Practice in Regulating Pharmaceuticals in Europe: Striving for Efficiency, Equity and Quality. Mossialos E, Mrazek M, Walley T (Eds). Open University Press (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Barton S. Using clinical evidence. BMJ322, 503–504 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsson DG, de Petro C, Paxeus N. Effluent from drug manufactures contains extremely high levels of pharmaceuticals. J. Hazard. Mater.148(3), 751–755 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wennmalm Å, Gunnarsson B. Public Health care management of water pollution with pharmaceuticals: environmental classification and analysis of pharmaceutical residues in sewage water. Drug Inf. J.39, 291–297 (2005).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castensson S, Eriksson V, Lindborg K, Wettermark B. A method to include the environmental hazard in drug prescribing. Pharm. World Sci.31, 24–31 (2009).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Simoens S. International comparison of generic medicine prices. Curr. Med. Res. Opin.23, 2647–2654 (2007).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jack A. Balancing Big Pharma’s books. BMJ336, 418–419 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Godman B, Haycox A, Schwabe U et al. Having your cake and eating it: Office of Fair Trading proposal for funding new drugs to benefit patients and innovative companies. Pharmacoeconomics26, 91–98 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Ganse E, Vukusic S, Zanetti L et al. TYSEDMUS: Cohort of multiple sclerosis patients treated with TYSARBI using the French European database for multiple sclerosis (EDMUS) – methodological aspects. Pharmacoepidemiol. Drug Saf.17, S1–S294 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Frisk P, Mellgren T-O, Hedberg N et al. Utilisation of angiotensin receptor blockers in Sweden: combining survey and register data to study adherence to prescribing guidelines. Eur. J. Clin. Pharmacol.64, 1223–1229 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rothman D, Chimonas S. New developments in managing physician-industry relationships. JAMA300, 1067–1069 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Ferber L, Bausch J, Köster I et al. Pharmacotherapeutic Circles – Results of an 18-month peer-review prescribing-improvement programme for general practioners. Pharmacoeconomics16, 273–283 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider A, Wensing M, Biessecker et al. Impact of quality circles for improvement of asthma care: results of a randomised controlled trial. J. Eval. Clin. Pract.14, 185–190 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Walley T, Mrazwek M, Mossialos E. Regulating pharmaceutical markets: Improving efficiency and controlling costs in the UK. Int. J .Health Plann. Manage.20, 375–398 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Harris C, Scrivener G. Fundholders’ prescribing costs: the first five years. BMJ313, 1531–1534 (1996).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mason AR, Drummond MF, Hunter JA et al. Prescribing incentive schemes: a useful approach? Appl. Health Econ. Health Policy4, 111–117 (2005).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Martens J, Werkhiven M, Severens J, Winkens R. Effects of a behaviour independent financial incentive on prescribing behaviour of general practioners. J. Eval. Clinical Practice13, 369–373 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Godman B, Bucsics A, Burkhardt T et al. Insight into recent reforms and initiatives in Austria; implications for key stakeholders. Expert Rev. Pharmacoeconomcis Outcomes Res.8, 357–371 (2008).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Grandfils N and Sermet C. Pharmaceutical policy in France: a mosaic of reforms. Eurohealth12, 15–17 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Sandier S, Paris V, Polton D. Health Care Systems in Transition. France. Copenhagen. WHO Regional office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. WHO (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Garattini S, Bertelè V. How can we regulate medicines better? BMJ335, 803–805 (2007).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar