1. Portfolio/Number/Name:H/C9-Drugs pricing |
2. Programme/Activity: Please
include a short description This programme relates to supply side
activities to improve value for money in
national arrangements for the pricing of
drugs by NHSScotland |
3. Planned Savings | | 2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 |
Cash (m) | 42 | 42 | 42 |
Time Releasing (m) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
4. Accountable Officer for
delivery | K.Woods |
5. Project Manager | C.Naldrett |
6. EGDG account manager | G.Woolman |
7. Quality Impact | Describe any impact on the quality
of service delivery. Be specific and
explain if the expectation is positive,
negative or neutral. The immediate impact on quality of
service provision is likely to be
neutral. There is a risk that an overambitious
cost reduction exercise could work through
to reduced service provision if drug
suppliers were to decide that it were not
cost effective for them to supply the NHS
at prices determined according to new
arrangements. On the other hand a formal agreement
with the industry on branded drugs pricing,
which individual companies can live with,
provides them with a fair return and a
continuing incentive to develop new
products that will improve patient
care. |
8. Dependencies | Explain if your savings are
dependant on legislation or other
structural changes being achieved. There are no legislative
implications. Reimbursement prices for drugs are set
by Directions through the Scottish Drug
Tariff which itself is enabled by the
Pharmaceutical Services Regulations
(Scotland) 1995. |
9. Description of efficiency and
actions to be taken | 9.1 How will the saving be made? Be
specific about number/size of contracts, staff,
posts dates etc. In the main by implementation of a
revised Pharmaceutical Prices Regulation
Scheme negotiated on a UK basis with the
industry. These impact on the prices of
'branded' products used in Primary Care,
i.e. drugs still protected by licence.
These account for around 2/3rds of Primary
Care drug costs. Opportunities for savings
in other areas will continue to be
pursued. |
9.2 What action is critically needed to
secure delivery of this saving? Be specific,
and name the key action managers if they are
outwith your immediate management chain (e.g.
in an NDPB.) Finalisation of revised PPRS
arrangements. These are now largely in place, with
only one small element, where the financial
impact is marginal, relating to so called
standard branded generics is still to be
clarified. SEHD representative in negotiations on
PPRS has been Prof. Scott, CPO. |
10. Impact on Staffing to achieve the efficiency
gain | If there are to be any changes in
staff numbers (at activity level) to
achieve the efficiency gain, please
indicate how many full time equivalents and
how far you expect savings to be achieved
by natural wastage (show additions as + and
reductions as -). |
| 2005- 06 | 2006- 07 | 2007- 08 |
+ | | | |
- | | | |
Net | | | |
Explanation | No change in complement planned. |
11. Benefits | In general, the benefits of the
Scottish Executive Efficiency Plan are the
enhanced outputs from the resources
Ministers have been able to allocate in
SR04. But if there is a direct connection
between this efficiency saving and the
enhancement of a particular service please
describe it here. N/A |
12. Gross/Net Cash Savings | 12.1 Please set out the gross recurring
saving and any offsetting recurring
expenditure. Gross Target- 42m |
12.2 Against what budget does this
expenditure and saving fall? Health Boards' Unified Budgets |
12.3 Has this saving been built into your
budget? Yes, in that there is an assumption
that Boards and prescribers will
automatically benefit from any supply side
generated savings (and conversely absorb
any cost increases) achieved through
nationally set arrangements to offset
rolling cost increases associated with
greater use of effective therapies and
costs of new drugs, which in the recent
past have always generated a gross pressure
above the rate of inflation. |
12.4 If so, what is the maximum allowable
expenditure against the budget data, in each
year, for that saving to be
delivered? The rate of saving will depend on the
rate of prescriptions of prescribed
drugs. |
12.5 If not, how do you propose to invest
the additional cash back into public
services? N/A |
12.6 What plans do you have to exceed the
required saving? Explain by how much in each
year. We are continuing to review the other
areas of drug and prescribable items
purchasing to identify and deliver further
savings. It is too early to be more
specific about the potential extent of
savings at this stage. |
13. Time - release savings | 13.1 Please explain any time-releasing
savings indicated at question 3 N/A. |
13.2 Please describe the method you
plan to use to calculate the cash
equivalent of those time release
savings. N/A |
14. Measurement and
Monitoring | 14.1 How are you proposing to measure the
expected efficiency benefits (e.g. in terms of
costs, level of output or quality of
service)? To monitor the effects of the PPRS
target 7% price cut across all branded
drugs purchased in Primary Care. |
14.2 What monitoring & reporting
procedures will be put in place to measure the
efficiency savings (How often will progress
towards the target be monitored? Who will have
lead responsibility for reporting progress and
what procedures will be in place?) There is extensive and reliable data
available from NHSNSS Information Services
to allow the costs of Primary Care
prescribing to be monitored. Availability
however lags prescribing by 3-4 months.
Monitoring will be quarterly -after
availability of data- and will be by
NHSNSS. |
14.3 Monitoring Data: Sources, validation
and risks - What data will be used to
measure progress? Is all the required
information quantifiable and readily
available? If not what action will be
taken to rectify this?
- What measures will be in place
to validate the accuracy of the data?
Who will take responsibility for this?
- Are there any issues or risks
relating to how you plan to use the data?
(e.g. accuracy, difficulties in
collection)
See answer to previous
question.
|