Literature DB >> 28258399

Beyond QALYs: Multi-criteria based estimation of maximum willingness to pay for health technologies.

Erik Nord1.   

Abstract

The QALY is a useful outcome measure in cost-effectiveness analysis. But in determining the overall value of and societal willingness to pay for health technologies, gains in quality of life and length of life are prima facie separate criteria that need not be put together in a single concept. A focus on costs per QALY can also be counterproductive. One reason is that the QALY does not capture well the value of interventions in patients with reduced potentials for health and thus different reference points. Another reason is a need to separate losses of length of life and losses of quality of life when it comes to judging the strength of moral claims on resources in patients of different ages. An alternative to the cost-per-QALY approach is outlined, consisting in the development of two bivariate value tables that may be used in combination to estimate maximum cost acceptance for given units of treatment-for instance a surgical procedure, or 1 year of medication-rather than for 'obtaining one QALY.' The approach is a follow-up of earlier work on 'cost value analysis.' It draws on work in the QALY field insofar as it uses health state values established in that field. But it does not use these values to weight life years and thus avoids devaluing gained life years in people with chronic illness or disability. Real tables of the kind proposed could be developed in deliberative processes among policy makers and serve as guidance for decision makers involved in health technology assessment and appraisal.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Absolute shortfall; Cost value analysis; Graded willingness to pay; Proportional shortfall; QALY; Societal value

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28258399     DOI: 10.1007/s10198-017-0882-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Health Econ        ISSN: 1618-7598


  18 in total

1.  Justice and the ADA: does prioritizing and rationing health care discriminate against the disabled?

Authors:  Dan W Brock
Journal:  Soc Philos Policy       Date:  1995

2.  A new proposal for priority setting in Norway: Open and fair.

Authors:  Trygve Ottersen; Reidun Førde; Meetali Kakad; Alice Kjellevold; Hans Olav Melberg; Atle Moen; Ånen Ringard; Ole Frithjof Norheim
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 2.980

Review 3.  Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the 'fair innings' argument.

Authors:  A Williams
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1997 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.046

4.  Cost-value analysis of health interventions: introduction and update on methods and preference data.

Authors:  Erik Nord
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Maximising health versus sharing: measuring preferences for the allocation of the health budget.

Authors:  Jeff Richardson; Kompal Sinha; Angelo Iezzi; Aimee Maxwell
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year gained? The need for alternative methods to evaluate medical interventions for ultra-rare disorders.

Authors:  Michael Schlander; Silvio Garattini; Søren Holm; Peter Kolominsky-Rabas; Erik Nord; Ulf Persson; Maarten Postma; Jeff Richardson; Steven Simoens; Oriol de Solà Morales; Keith Tolley; Mondher Toumi
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 1.744

7.  Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes.

Authors:  E Nord; J L Pinto; J Richardson; P Menzel; P Ubel
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.046

8.  QALYs: is the value of treatment proportional to the size of the health gain?

Authors:  Erik Nord; Anja Undrum Enge; Veronica Gundersen
Journal:  Health Econ       Date:  2010-05       Impact factor: 3.046

Review 9.  Concerns for severity in priority setting in health care: a review of trade-off data in preference studies and implications for societal willingness to pay for a QALY.

Authors:  Erik Nord; Rune Johansen
Journal:  Health Policy       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 2.980

10.  Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Ole F Norheim; Rob Baltussen; Mira Johri; Dan Chisholm; Erik Nord; DanW Brock; Per Carlsson; Richard Cookson; Norman Daniels; Marion Danis; Marc Fleurbaey; Kjell A Johansson; Lydia Kapiriri; Peter Littlejohns; Thomas Mbeeli; Krishna D Rao; Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer; Dan Wikler
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2014-08-29
View more
  9 in total

1.  The societal monetary value of a QALY associated with EQ-5D-3L health gains.

Authors:  Laura Vallejo-Torres; Borja García-Lorenzo; Oliver Rivero-Arias; José Luis Pinto-Prades
Journal:  Eur J Health Econ       Date:  2019-11-28

Review 2.  Capability instruments in economic evaluations of health-related interventions: a comparative review of the literature.

Authors:  Timea Mariann Helter; Joanna Coast; Agata Łaszewska; Tanja Stamm; Judit Simon
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2019-12-24       Impact factor: 4.147

3.  Determining Value in Health Technology Assessment: Stay the Course or Tack Away?

Authors:  J Jaime Caro; John E Brazier; Jonathan Karnon; Peter Kolominsky-Rabas; Alistair J McGuire; Erik Nord; Michael Schlander
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2019-03       Impact factor: 4.981

4.  Moving Towards Accountability for Reasonableness - A Systematic Exploration of the Features of Legitimate Healthcare Coverage Decision-Making Processes Using Rare Diseases and Regenerative Therapies as a Case Study.

Authors:  Monika Wagner; Dima Samaha; Roman Casciano; Matthew Brougham; Payam Abrishami; Charles Petrie; Bernard Avouac; Lorenzo Mantovani; Antonio Sarría-Santamera; Paul Kind; Michael Schlander; Michele Tringali
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2019-07-01

5.  An ethical framework for evaluation of public health plans: a systematic process for legitimate and fair decision-making.

Authors:  F Akrami; A Zali; M Abbasi; R Majdzadeh; A Karimi; M Fadavi; A Mehrabi Bahar
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2018-08-28       Impact factor: 2.427

6.  Heterogeneity in preferences for outcomes of integrated care for persons with multiple chronic diseases: a latent class analysis of a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Maaike Hoedemakers; Milad Karimi; Marcel Jonker; Apostolos Tsiachristas; Maureen Rutten-van Mölken
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 3.440

7.  Including Future Consumption and Production in Economic Evaluation of Interventions that Save Life-Years: Commentary.

Authors:  Erik Nord; Christoffer Lamøy
Journal:  Pharmacoecon Open       Date:  2018-12

8.  Value in Hepatitis C Virus Treatment: A Patient-Centered Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

Authors:  T Joseph Mattingly; Julia F Slejko; Eberechukwu Onukwugha; Eleanor M Perfetto; Shyamasundaran Kottilil; C Daniel Mullins
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 9.  Economic value of protected areas via visitor mental health.

Authors:  Ralf Buckley; Paula Brough; Leah Hague; Alienor Chauvenet; Chris Fleming; Elisha Roche; Ernesta Sofija; Neil Harris
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 14.919

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.