Author: admin

  • Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Barron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to substitute the prescribing of high volume branded medicine with generic equivalents.

    George Freeman

    Generic substitution has happened in secondary care for many years, but is not currently permitted in primary care. The Department consulted on introducing primary care generic substitution in 2010, but did not progress the proposals following concerns about the potential impact on patient safety.

    Most general practitioner practices and clinical commissioning groups, formerly primary care trusts, have been pursuing and supporting policies of increasing generic prescribing for 15 years or more. Generic prescribing rates are already relatively high in England at 84.1% in 2014, as reported in the Health and Social Care Information Centre report: Prescriptions dispensed in the community: England 2004-14.

  • Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Barron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the potential annual savings to the NHS through greater generic substitution compared to using their reference originator products; and what assessment he has made of the obstacles to implementing such a policy for (a) inhalers and biologics and (b) after complex products.

    George Freeman

    The Government has made no such assessments. England has one of the highest levels of generic prescribing in Europe. In 2014, the Health & Social Care Information Centre report Prescriptions Dispensed in the community: England 2004-14, shows that of all medicines dispensed in 2014, 84.1% were dispensed generically.

    Prescribers are ultimately responsible for their own prescribing decisions. We expect them to always satisfy themselves that the medicines they consider appropriate for their patients can be safely prescribed and that patients are adequately monitored.

  • Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Barron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he has had with the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency about the requirement for some generic medicines to be given a brand name for clinical reasons; and what steps he is taking to ensure patients receive the brand name medicine specified.

    George Freeman

    The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is the Executive Agency of Department of Health with overall responsibility for medicines licensing.

    The responsibility for prescribing rests with the practitioner who has clinical responsibility for their patient’s care and we would expect practitioners to take any relevant guidance into account when making their prescribing decisions.Prescribers utilise a wide range of information to inform their prescribing decisions including decision support systems and authoritative guidance such as that from the MHRA, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the British National Formulary.

    In primary care, if it is clinically appropriate for an individual patient to be maintained on a specific manufacturer’s product then the prescriber can specify this on the prescription for that product to be dispensed. Officials from the Department and MHRA liaise as required on the application of this policy.

  • Stephen Kinnock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Stephen Kinnock – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Stephen Kinnock on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will commission an inquiry into contaminated blood in England and Wales.

    Jane Ellison

    Given the thoroughness of Lord Penrose’s report, published in March 2015 and the fact that the report sets the events in Scotland in the wider UK context at that time, our view remains that there is no need for a further public inquiry in England. The report, together with over 5,000 documents from the period 1970-85 that have already been published by the Government, provides a comprehensive picture of events and decisions made. Another Inquiry would not be in the best interests of sufferers and their families as it would be costly and further delay action to address their concerns and significantly delay plans to reform existing payment support schemes.

    On 21 January 2016, the Government published a consultation seeking views on proposed reforms to the schemes supporting those infected with, or affected by, HIV and/or hepatitis C through NHS-supplied blood products. I would encourage all those with an interest to respond.

  • Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Barron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what plans he has to include generic medicines which are required to have a brand name by the MHRA and are already subject to market competition alongside originator medicines in the Statutory Scheme of Control the Prices of Branded Health Service Medicines.

    George Freeman

    The Department consulted on options to amend the Statutory Scheme regulations which control the prices of branded health service medicines. Both the voluntary Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme and the statutory scheme include all health service medicines with a brand name, including those required by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to have a brand name. The Department did not propose any changes to the scope of the statutory scheme in this respect and has not made an estimate of the cost of removing those branded medicines from the statutory scheme.

    The Department received responses from a range of organisations including National Health Service, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry. The Department is currently analysing the responses from a range of organisations including NHS, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry.

    The consultation and impact assessment can be accessed using the following link.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pricing-of-branded-health-service-medicines

    “

  • Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Kevin Barron – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Kevin Barron on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what estimate he has made of the cost to the NHS of removing generic medicines required to have a brand name by the MHRA from the Statutory Scheme of Control the Prices of Branded Health Service Medicines.

    George Freeman

    The Department consulted on options to amend the Statutory Scheme regulations which control the prices of branded health service medicines. Both the voluntary Pharmaceutical Price Regulation Scheme and the statutory scheme include all health service medicines with a brand name, including those required by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency to have a brand name. The Department did not propose any changes to the scope of the statutory scheme in this respect and has not made an estimate of the cost of removing those branded medicines from the statutory scheme.

    The Department received responses from a range of organisations including National Health Service, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry. The Department is currently analysing the responses from a range of organisations including NHS, independent bodies and pharmaceutical industry.

    The consultation and impact assessment can be accessed using the following link.

    https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/pricing-of-branded-health-service-medicines

    “

  • Mark Durkan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mark Durkan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Durkan on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, if he will ask NHS England to publish a case study of the revised Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) patient journey and give examples for how people are initiated onto CDF-approved treatments now and how people will be treated under the proposed new CDF scheme.

    George Freeman

    NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are currently consulting jointly on draft proposals on the future direction of the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF). The consultation document states that all patients receiving treatment funded through the CDF on 31 March 2016 will continue to receive treatment until the point that they and their consultant agree that it is appropriate to stop.

    NHS England has advised that the aim of the future CDF is to help patients receive new treatments with genuine promise, while real world evidence is collected for up to two years on how well they work in practice. This will then help determine whether the treatment should be accepted for routine use in the National Health Service in the future. It is not possible to make comparisons between the current and future CDF until such time as the consultation has concluded and the responses reviewed.

    The consultation was published on 19 November 2015 and is open until 11 February 2016. Further information is available at:

    www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

    “

  • Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Luciana Berger – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Luciana Berger on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many and which health (a) trusts and (b) services (i) Jane Cummings, (ii) Dame Barbara Hakin, (iii) Paul Baumann, (iv) Karen Wheeler and (v) Ian Dodge have visited in each year since their appointments to the board of NHS England; and on what dates each such visit was held.

    George Freeman

    This information is not held by the Department. NHS England has advised that this information is not routinely collected and it could only be collated and provided at disproportionate cost.

  • Flick Drummond – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Flick Drummond – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Flick Drummond on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 12 October 2015 to Question 10658, if he will ensure that the national improvement framework for hepatitis C services contain guidance on the alignment of screening programmes for hepatitis C, HIV, tuberculosis and other blood-borne viruses or associated conditions.

    Jane Ellison

    Recommendations on testing for hepatitis C are evidence-based, including whether it is appropriate to align with guidance on testing for other conditions. It should be noted that the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has already published guidance on testing for hepatitis B and C. Screening programmes are considered and recommended by the United Kingdom National Screening Committee.

  • Mark Durkan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Mark Durkan – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Mark Durkan on 2016-01-13.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions the his Department, NHS England and NICE have had on the effect of proposed Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF) changes on patients prescribed current CDF treatments who will not receive interim funding under that proposed new scheme.

    George Freeman

    NHS England and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence are currently consulting jointly on draft proposals on the future direction of the Cancer Drugs Fund (CDF). The consultation document states that all patients receiving treatment funded through the CDF on 31 March 2016 will continue to receive treatment until the point that they and their consultant agree that it is appropriate to stop.

    NHS England has advised that the aim of the future CDF is to help patients receive new treatments with genuine promise, while real world evidence is collected for up to two years on how well they work in practice. This will then help determine whether the treatment should be accepted for routine use in the National Health Service in the future. It is not possible to make comparisons between the current and future CDF until such time as the consultation has concluded and the responses reviewed.

    The consultation was published on 19 November 2015 and is open until 11 February 2016. Further information is available at:

    www.engage.england.nhs.uk/consultation/cdf-consultation

    “