I can't speak to UK practices or any EU system, but in the general case, note that there are two ways of structuring a reimbursement system: reimbursement for use of a particular product, and reimbursement of a set amount for the entire process of treating-to-completion a diagnosed condition.
The first type of system operates as already described. Some system experts consider that system-type to result in over-use of devices by a few participants so as to increase their reimbursement.
The second type of system is based on total-treatment reimbursements that are about equal to the average cost of a number of audited treatment-courses for a given condition. This reimbursement amount of course over-reimburses if the care provider has lower costs, and under-reimburses for higher costs, so it powerfully motivates the care provider to not over-prescribe, not waste anything, and adopt minimum-cost processes. Some argue that it de-motivates patient-focused care in order to minimize costs.
USA currently has a diverse system of care for privately insured individuals, operated by many separate insurance companies using disparate rules, but mostly of the second type in general. USA has a government-funded reimbursement system for care provided to individuals who are eligible for Medicaid/Medicare, i.e. persons over the age of 62 and/or (in some cases) unable to afford adequate care themselves. This system is kind of a hybrid right now, but supposedly is transitioning to the second system-approach. USA also may be moving toward a much broader government-funded reimbursement system for most working age individuals and children. If that system is implemented, it's probably going to be the second system-type from inception.