We have detected that you are using Internet Explorer to visit this website. Internet Explorer is now being phased out by Microsoft. As a result, NHS Digital no longer supports any version of Internet Explorer for our web-based products, as it involves considerable extra effort and expense, which cannot be justified from public funds. Some features on this site will not work. You should use a modern browser such as Edge, Chrome, Firefox, or Safari. If you have difficulty installing or accessing a different browser, contact your IT support team.
Publication, Part of Use of NICE-appraised medicines in the NHS in England
Use of NICE appraised medicines in the NHS in England - 2009, Experimental statistics
Official statistics- Publication Date:
- 26 Jan 2011
- Geographic Coverage:
- England
- Geographical Granularity:
- Country, Cancer networks, Strategic Health Authorities, Primary Care Organisations, Clinical Commissioning Groups
- Date Range:
- 01 Jan 2009 to 31 Dec 2009
Summary
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Technology Appraisal process assesses the clinical and cost effectiveness of new and existing drugs and treatments, and provides guidance on their use by the NHS. As part of the Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme (PPRS) agreement which came into operation on 1st January 2009, the Department of Health (DH) and the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry agreed that the DH would review the variation in uptake of selected medicines in the NHS in England.
The NHS Information Centre was asked to produce a bulletin looking at variation in the use of these medicines in relation to the number of eligible patients as estimated by NICE. Data on the number of patients being treated is not available and so predicted use (using the average dose and average length of treatment) was compared with observed use. Data on observed use in 2009 was taken from the primary care prescribing data from NHS Prescribing Services and secondary care data provided by IMSHealth.
In all 47 medicines in 18 groups, relating to 29 technology appraisals, were considered. For 12 groups a comparison could be made (these are presented in Section 1 of the technology section results). For those appraisals where a valid comparison could not be made (these are presented in Section 2 of the technology results), the reasons why the comparison could not be made are presented along with a series of questions inviting the reader to suggest improvements to the method or data.
This is an experimental publication and is the second of a planned annual series. Feedback is requested to help inform how best to estimate uptake to allow meaningful interpretation of any variation across NHS organisations in future. A feedback from is provided.
Highlights
- Of the 12 groups where a comparison could be made, observed use by the NHS in England was higher than the predicted use for 8 and lower for 3. In the case of drugs used for acute coronary syndrome, the result was lower on one set of assumptions and higher on the alternative.
- For six groups of drugs no valid comparison could be made for a variety of reasons including a wider range of licensed indications than NICE had appraised
Resources
Last edited: 12 February 2019 3:52 pm