Challenges to pharmaceutical policymaking: lessons from Australia’s national medicines policy
Wendy Lipworth A B D , Evan Doran B , Ian Kerridge B and Richard Day CA Australian Institute of Health Innovation, AGSM Building, Level 1, University of New South Wales, NSW 2052, Australia.
B Centre for Values, Ethics and the Law in Medicine, Medical Foundation Building (K25), University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.
C Department of Clinical Pharmacology, St Vincent’s Hospital Sydney and Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Victoria St, Darlinghurst, NSW 2010, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: w.lipworth@unsw.edu.au; wendylipworth@gmail.com
Australian Health Review 38(2) 160-168 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH13240
Submitted: 15 June 2013 Accepted: 29 December 2013 Published: 4 March 2014
Abstract
Objective National medicines policies (NMP) provide a means for governments to achieve their objectives in relation to pharmaceuticals and other medicines. This research aimed to identify challenges to implementing the objectives of the Australian NMP from the perspective of key stakeholders.
Methods In 2012 and 2103, we conducted 30 semistructured interviews with stakeholders involved in the discovery, clinical testing, regulation and funding of medicines in Australia. We asked participants to describe their careers and to give their opinions on specific issues surrounding drug development, clinical research, regulation and subsidisation in Australia. Data were analysed using Morse’s outline of the cognitive basis of qualitative research and Charmaz’s outline of data analysis in grounded theory. The initial phase of ‘open coding’ revealed findings that could be mapped to three of the four objectives of the NMP. We then conducted ‘focussed coding’ for themes relevant to these objectives.
Results Participants identified many issues relevant to the ongoing evolution of the NMP, relating primarily to ongoing tensions between the commercial objective of ensuring a viable medicines industry, and the non-commercial objectives of ensuring that medicines are safe, effective and affordable. There were also several other challenges identified to the achievement of both the commercial and non-commercial objectives of the NMP. These included limits to government funding, globalisation, consumer advocacy, changing scientific paradigms and new information technologies.
Conclusions There are many issues that need to be addressed if policymakers are to achieve the best outcomes from the NMP. Tensions between the commercial and non-commercial objectives of the NMP suggest the need to ensure that one stakeholder group’s imperatives do not stifle those of other groups. At the same time, there are several emerging issues that are likely to concern all stakeholders equally, and these are both challenges and opportunities for new kinds of collaboration.
What is known about the topic? We know that stakeholders have several concerns about medicines policy, but little is known about the specific challenges to implementing medicines policy from the perspective of those involved.
What does this paper add? We demonstrate that stakeholders have many concerns that could impact the implementation of medicines policies. These relate primarily to ongoing tensions between the objective of ensuring a viable medicines industry, and the objectives of ensuring that medicines are safe, effective and affordable. There are also several issues that potentially pose a challenge to achieving both the commercial and non-commercial objectives of the NMP. These include limits to government funding, globalisation, consumer advocacy, changing scientific paradigms and new information technologies.
What are the implications for practitioners? Policymakers need to systematically address the barriers to the ongoing implementation of the NMP. Policymakers should also ensure that one imperative (such as the commercial imperative) does not stifle other objectives. Other emerging issues are likely to concern all stakeholders, and these provide opportunities for new kinds of collaboration among stakeholders.
Additional keywords: drug development, economics, public policy, regulation.
References
[1] World Health Organization. How to develop and implement a national drug policy. 2nd edn. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001. Available from: http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/pdf/s2283e/s2283e.pdf [verified 25 May 2013].[2] Morgan S, Kennedy J, Boothe K, McMahon M, Watson D, Roughead E. Toward an understanding of high performance pharmaceutical policy systems: a ‘Triple-A’ framework and example analysis. Open Health Serv Policy J 2009; 2 1–9.
| Toward an understanding of high performance pharmaceutical policy systems: a ‘Triple-A’ framework and example analysis.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
[3] Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care. The national medicines policy. Canberra: 1999.
[4] Hogerzeil H. The concept of essential medicines: lessons for rich countries. BMJ 2004; 329 1169–72.
| The concept of essential medicines: lessons for rich countries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15539676PubMed |
[5] Morgan S, McMahon M, Greyson D. Balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector: lessons from Australia. Health Policy 2008; 87 133–45.
| Balancing health and industrial policy objectives in the pharmaceutical sector: lessons from Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 18295927PubMed |
[6] Lofgren H. Regulation and the politics of pharmaceuticals in Australia. In Eggleston K, editor. Prescribing cultures and pharmaceutical policy in the Asia-Pacific. Washington DC: Brookings Press; 2009. pp. 129–144.
[7] Roughead E. Australia’s national medicines policy: providing an integrated policy platform for pharmaceuticals. 2006. Available from: http://www.allhealth.org/briefingmaterials/rougheadbackground_fnl_062006-356.doc [verified 25 May 2013].
[8] Duckett SJ. Drug policy down under: Australia’s Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Health Care Financ Rev 2004; 25 55–67.
| 15229996PubMed |
[9] Lofgren H, de Boer R. Pharmaceuticals in Australia: developments in regulation and governance. Soc Sci Med 2004; 58 2397–407.
| Pharmaceuticals in Australia: developments in regulation and governance.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 15081192PubMed |
[10] Weekes LM, Mackson JM, Fitzgerald M, Phillips S. National Prescribing Service: creating an implementation arm for national medicines policy. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 59 112–6.
| National Prescribing Service: creating an implementation arm for national medicines policy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BD2cnjtFartw%3D%3D&md5=f469204ef4913696465ad97d4bc92d5aCAS | 15606449PubMed |
[11] Searles A, Jefferys S, Doran E, Henry D. Reference pricing, generic drugs and proposed changes to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. Med J Aust 2007; 187 236–9.
| 17564580PubMed |
[12] Spinks J, Richardson J. Paying the right price for pharmaceuticals: a case study of why the comparator matters. Aust Health Rev 2011; 35 267–72.
| Paying the right price for pharmaceuticals: a case study of why the comparator matters.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21871185PubMed |
[13] Wang N, Lipworth W, Ritchie J, Williams K, Day R. Eliciting views of Australian pharmaceutical industry employees on collaboration and the concept of quality use of medicines. Intern Med J 2011; 41 314–20.
| Eliciting views of Australian pharmaceutical industry employees on collaboration and the concept of quality use of medicines.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MvkvFGrsQ%3D%3D&md5=c3d6cc50b67ca10f2d2aa11b631fd1d9CAS | 20403068PubMed |
[14] Commonwealth of Australia. National strategy for quality use of medicines. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia; 2002.
[15] Dowden J. The national prescribing service. Australian Prescriber 1998; 21 30–31.
[16] Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage; 2006.
[17] Morse JM. ‘Emerging from the data’: The cognitive processes of analysis in qualitative inquiry. In Morse JM, editor. Critical issues in qualitative research methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1994. pp. 23–42.
