Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
49,337
result(s) for
"cost effectiveness"
Sort by:
Estimating a cost-effectiveness threshold for health care decision-making in South Africa
Abstract
Cost-effectiveness thresholds are important decision rules that determine whether health interventions represent good value for money. In low- and middle-income countries, the World Health Organization (WHO) one to three times per capita gross domestic product (GDP) per disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted has been the most widely used threshold for informing resource allocation decisions. However, in 2016, the WHO withdrew recommendations for using this threshold, creating a significant vacuum in South Africa and many countries that rely on results of cost-effectiveness analyses for making resource allocation decisions. This study estimates a cost-effectiveness threshold that reflects the health opportunity cost of health spending in South Africa using a three-step approach. First, marginal returns to health spending was estimated as health spending elasticity for crude death rates using a fixed effect estimation approach. Second, the opportunity cost of health spending was estimated as DALYs averted. Finally, a cost per DALY averted threshold was estimated as the inverse of the marginal product of health spending. We show that 1% of total health spending in 2015 (equivalent to approximately ZAR 1.54 billion/USD 120.7 million) averted 1050 deaths, 34 180 years of life lost, 5880 years lived with disability and 40 055 DALYs. The cost-effectiveness threshold was estimated at approximately ZAR 38 500 (USD 3015) per DALY averted, ∼53% of South Africa’s per capita GDP in 2015 (ZAR 72 700/USD 5700) and lower than the previously recommended one to three times per capita GDP. As South Africa moves towards implementing universal health coverage reforms through National Health Insurance by 2025, the adoption of a threshold that reflects health opportunity costs will be crucial for ensuring efficiency in the allocation of scarce resources. This study provides useful insight into the magnitude of the health opportunity cost of health spending in South Africa and highlights the need for further research.
Journal Article
From sample average treatment effect to population average treatment effect on the treated: combining experimental with observational studies to estimate population treatment effects
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) can provide unbiased estimates of sample average treatment effects. However, a common concern is that RCTs may fail to provide unbiased estimates of population average treatment effects. We derive the assumptions that are required to identify population average treatment effects from RCTs. We provide placebo tests, which formally follow from the identifying assumptions and can assess whether they hold. We offer new research designs for estimating population effects that use non-randomized studies to adjust the RCT data. This approach is considered in a cost-effectiveness analysis of a clinical intervention: pulmonary artery catheterization.
Journal Article
Sponsorship bias in oncology cost effectiveness analysis
Cost effectiveness analysis (CEA) has been increasingly used to inform cancer treatment coverage policy making worldwide. The primary objective of this study was to assess the association between industry sponsorship and CEA results in oncology.
All CEAs in oncology used incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) as health effect identified from the Tufts CEA Registry since 1976 was analyzed. Descriptive analyses were performed to present and compare the characteristics of CEA funded by industry and non-industry. Robust logistic regression was performed to assess the relationship between the industry sponsorship and cost effective conclusion over a wide range of threshold values.
A total of 1537 CEAs in oncology published from 1976 to 2021 were included. There were 387 (25.2%) with the industry sponsorship. CEAs sponsored by the industry were more likely to report ICERs below $50,000/QALY (adjusted odds ratio (OR), 1.91, 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.45-2.51, P < 0.001), $100,000/QALY (2.74, 1.98-3.79, P < 0.001), and $150,000/QALY (3.53, 2.37-5.27, P < 0.001) than studies without industry sponsorship.
Our study suggests that there has been a significant sponsorship bias in CEAs in oncology. This bias could have a profound implication on drug pricing and coverage policy making.
Journal Article
Thresholds for the cost–effectiveness of interventions: alternative approaches
Many countries use the cost-effectiveness thresholds recommended by the World Health Organization's Choosing Interventions that are Cost-Effective project (WHO-CHOICE) when evaluating health interventions. This project sets the threshold for cost-effectiveness as the cost of the intervention per disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) averted less than three times the country's annual gross domestic product (GDP) per capita. Highly cost-effective interventions are defined as meeting a threshold per DALY averted of once the annual GDP per capita. We argue that reliance on these thresholds reduces the value of cost-effectiveness analyses and makes such analyses too blunt to be useful for most decision-making in the field of public health. Use of these thresholds has little theoretical justification, skirts the difficult but necessary ranking of the relative values of locally-applicable interventions and omits any consideration of what is truly affordable. The WHO-CHOICE thresholds set such a low bar for cost-effectiveness that very few interventions with evidence of efficacy can be ruled out. The thresholds have little value in assessing the trade-offs that decision-makers must confront. We present alternative approaches for applying cost-effectiveness criteria to choices in the allocation of health-care resources.
Journal Article
Variation in Health Care Spending
Health care in the United States is more expensive than in other developed countries, costing $2.7 trillion in 2011, or 17.9 percent of the national gross domestic product. Increasing costs strain budgets at all levels of government and threaten the solvency of Medicare, the nation's largest health insurer. At the same time, despite advances in biomedical science, medicine, and public health, health care quality remains inconsistent. In fact, underuse, misuse, and overuse of various services often put patients in danger.
Many efforts to improve this situation are focused on Medicare, which mainly pays practitioners on a fee-for-service basis and hospitals on a diagnoses-related group basis, which is a fee for a group of services related to a particular diagnosis. Research has long shown that Medicare spending varies greatly in different regions of the country even when expenditures are adjusted for variation in the costs of doing business, meaning that certain regions have much higher volume and/or intensity of services than others. Further, regions that deliver more services do not appear to achieve better health outcomes than those that deliver less.
Variation in Health Care Spending investigates geographic variation in health care spending and quality for Medicare beneficiaries as well as other populations, and analyzes Medicare payment policies that could encourage high-value care. This report concludes that regional differences in Medicare and commercial health care spending and use are real and persist over time. Furthermore, there is much variation within geographic areas, no matter how broadly or narrowly these areas are defined. The report recommends against adoption of a geographically based value index for Medicare payments, because the majority of health care decisions are made at the provider or health care organization level, not by geographic units. Rather, to promote high value services from all providers, Medicare and Medicaid Services should continue to test payment reforms that offer incentives to providers to share clinical data, coordinate patient care, and assume some financial risk for the care of their patients.
Medicare covers more than 47 million Americans, including 39 million people age 65 and older and 8 million people with disabilities. Medicare payment reform has the potential to improve health, promote efficiency in the U.S. health care system, and reorient competition in the health care market around the value of services rather than the volume of services provided. The recommendations of Variation in Health Care Spending are designed to help Medicare and Medicaid Services encourage providers to efficiently manage the full range of care for their patients, thereby increasing the value of health care in the United States.
eBook