Cargando…

Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis

BACKGROUND: In Canada, cost prohibits access to emergency contraception (EC) which may assist to prevent unintended pregnancy. The drug, ulipristal acetate (UPA-EC), is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the prior standard levonorgestrel (LNG-EC). We analyzed provincial EC subsidizati...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lee, Sabrina C., Norman, Wendy V.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9438154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36050668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08416-1
_version_ 1784781764883906560
author Lee, Sabrina C.
Norman, Wendy V.
author_facet Lee, Sabrina C.
Norman, Wendy V.
author_sort Lee, Sabrina C.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In Canada, cost prohibits access to emergency contraception (EC) which may assist to prevent unintended pregnancy. The drug, ulipristal acetate (UPA-EC), is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the prior standard levonorgestrel (LNG-EC). We analyzed provincial EC subsidization policies and examined underlying decision-making processes. METHODS: We undertook documentary analysis of provincial EC subsidization policies in publicly available drug formularies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants to explore the processes underlying current policies. RESULTS: Quebec is the only province to subsidize UPA-EC, whilst all ten provinces subsidize LNG-EC. As such, provincial EC subsidization policies do not align with the latest UPA-EC evidence. Interviews revealed that evidence was valued in the policymaking process and formulary decisions were made through interdisciplinary consensus. CONCLUSIONS: We identify a gap between EC subsidization policies and the latest evidence. Institutional structures affect policies reflecting evolving evidence. Increasing interdisciplinary mechanisms may encourage evidence-based policies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9438154
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94381542022-09-03 Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis Lee, Sabrina C. Norman, Wendy V. BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: In Canada, cost prohibits access to emergency contraception (EC) which may assist to prevent unintended pregnancy. The drug, ulipristal acetate (UPA-EC), is more clinically effective and cost-effective than the prior standard levonorgestrel (LNG-EC). We analyzed provincial EC subsidization policies and examined underlying decision-making processes. METHODS: We undertook documentary analysis of provincial EC subsidization policies in publicly available drug formularies. We conducted semi-structured interviews with key informants to explore the processes underlying current policies. RESULTS: Quebec is the only province to subsidize UPA-EC, whilst all ten provinces subsidize LNG-EC. As such, provincial EC subsidization policies do not align with the latest UPA-EC evidence. Interviews revealed that evidence was valued in the policymaking process and formulary decisions were made through interdisciplinary consensus. CONCLUSIONS: We identify a gap between EC subsidization policies and the latest evidence. Institutional structures affect policies reflecting evolving evidence. Increasing interdisciplinary mechanisms may encourage evidence-based policies. BioMed Central 2022-09-01 /pmc/articles/PMC9438154/ /pubmed/36050668 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08416-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Lee, Sabrina C.
Norman, Wendy V.
Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title_full Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title_fullStr Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title_full_unstemmed Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title_short Emergency contraception subsidy in Canada: a comparative policy analysis
title_sort emergency contraception subsidy in canada: a comparative policy analysis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9438154/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36050668
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-022-08416-1
work_keys_str_mv AT leesabrinac emergencycontraceptionsubsidyincanadaacomparativepolicyanalysis
AT normanwendyv emergencycontraceptionsubsidyincanadaacomparativepolicyanalysis