+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ PDF Full Text
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Cost to the patient or cost to the healthcare system? Which one matters the most for GP prescribing decisions? A UK-Italy comparison

Cost to the patient or cost to the healthcare system? Which one matters the most for GP prescribing decisions? A UK-Italy comparison

European Journal of Public Health 13(1): 18-23

Charges for health services help contain healthcare costs. Despite showing that medicine consumption decreases when charges are increased there is little research that illuminates how doctors 'manage' the charge system to help patients who cannot afford treatment. This paper describes how the charge system influences the prescribing decisions of Italian and UK physicians. The data are from the qualitative stage of a multi-stage study exploring cost related influences on GP and patient decision-making regarding medicine use. The analysis presented is based on transcripts of focus groups conducted with general practitioners. To help patients who have difficulties affording their medication Italian GPs rely on a smaller number of cost reduction strategies compared to their UK counterparts. They use 'samples' left by pharmaceutical companies, or diagnose patients with pathologies that allow exemption. Occasionally they recommend some delay or change therapy to a cheaper but less effective alternative. Italian and UK GPs have firm views about preventing patients abusing the NHS and believe costs to the system are as important as costs to the individual patient. Prescribing budgets were not viewed in a positive light by Italian GPs. Due to the nature of the charge system in Italy GPs there are able to choose a reimbursable product for patients, so have less need than UK doctors to look for other means of reducing costs. Conversely, the UK GPs have developed a large number of cost reduction strategies, probably because of the charge system itself and the relatively high charges incurred by patients.

(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 048675138

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 12678309

DOI: 10.1093/eurpub/13.1.18

Related references

The cost and cost-effectiveness of PPIs--GP perspectives and responses to a prescribing dilemma and their implications for the development of patient-centred healthcare. European Journal of General Practice 9(4): 126-33, 140, 2004

Promoting cost effective prescribing. Cost effectiveness rapidly becomes cost containment. Bmj 311(6997): 126-127, 1995

Prescribing decisions should consider cost. Family Practice Management 13(9): 16, 23-16, 23, 2006

Direct healthcare cost of obesity in brazil: an application of the cost-of-illness method from the perspective of the public health system in 2011. Plos One 10(4): E0121160-E0121160, 2016

Cost comparison of second-line treatment options for late stage non-small-cell lung cancer: cost analysis for Italy. Clinicoeconomics and Outcomes Research 4(): 237-243, 2012

Do physicians take cost into account when making prescribing decisions?. Pharmacoeconomics 8(4): 282-290, 1995

Sevelamer is cost-saving vs. calcium carbonate in non-dialysis-dependent CKD patients in italy: a patient-level cost-effectiveness analysis of the INDEPENDENT study. Blood Purification 37(4): 316-324, 2015

Disentangling patient and public involvement in healthcare decisions: Why the difference matters. Sociology of Health & Illness (): -, 2016

The rising cost of healthcare. Cost increases drive healthcare to the top of the domestic policy agenda. Healthcare Executive 18(2): 70-71, 2003

Medication cost information in a computer-based patient record system. Impact on prescribing in a family medicine clinical practice. Archives of Family Medicine 8(2): 118-121, 1999

Cost-effectiveness of point-of-care C-reactive protein testing to inform antibiotic prescribing decisions. British Journal of General Practice 63(612): E465-E471, 2014

A new low cost, versatile intravascular imaging system provides high quality studies with substantially reduced cost of catheters for the patient. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 0(SPEC ISSUE): 241A, 1994

Predetermination and alternative course of treatment cost control or cost switching with increased cost to patient. Journal 56(2): 12-13, 1977

A comparison of the effects of inhaled steroid and salmeterol prescribing on exacerbations, symptom control and lifestyle in 2,432 patients with asthma in primary care using prescribing analysis and cost data. European Respiratory Journal Supplement 10(25): 104S, Sept, 1997

Promoting cost effective prescribing. Cost effectiveness studies may not be cost effective. Bmj 311(6997): 126-126, 1995