Andrea Messori1, Sabrina Trippoli2, Erminia Caccese2, Claudio Marinai2. 1. HTA Unit, ESTAR and University of Florence, Regional Health System, Via di San Salvi 12, 50100, Florence, Italy. andrea.messori.it@gmail.com. 2. HTA Unit, ESTAR and University of Florence, Regional Health System, Via di San Salvi 12, 50100, Florence, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In evaluating 3 or more comparators, pharmacoeconomic analyses can be improved by using the methodology of net monetary benefit (NMB) as opposed to incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). NMB is particularly suitable for managing competitive tenders that evaluate 3 or more devices in the same lot. For scientific purposes, the methodology of NMB is perfectly adequate. However, when tenders are managed in European countries, the Public Procurement Directive states that the tender score for price should be kept separate from that of clinical benefits. As a result, the traditional mathematical approach of NMB must be rearranged to comply with this administrative requirement. METHODS: In this report, we describe how the classic equations of NMB should be modified to achieve this purpose. The mathematical principle of proportionality, which is typical of the ICER, must be replaced by the principle of mathematical additivity, which is typical of NMB. Furthermore, to rearrange the scale of benefits according to the NMB, an estimate is needed of the minimum acceptable benefit converted into monetary units, which is associated with 0 in the benefit scale. RESULTS: A detailed example is presented to explain the practical application of these mathematical equations. These equations are widely applicable in the field of implantable devices. CONCLUSION: Since the expenditure for medical devices in European hospitals is close to that of hospital medicines, tenders for the in-hospital procurement of devices may represent a decisive tool to manage sustainability and ensure access to innovation. In this context, the methodology for managing clinical outcomes through tenders requires a specific mathematical approach that we have described in the present article.
BACKGROUND: In evaluating 3 or more comparators, pharmacoeconomic analyses can be improved by using the methodology of net monetary benefit (NMB) as opposed to incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). NMB is particularly suitable for managing competitive tenders that evaluate 3 or more devices in the same lot. For scientific purposes, the methodology of NMB is perfectly adequate. However, when tenders are managed in European countries, the Public Procurement Directive states that the tender score for price should be kept separate from that of clinical benefits. As a result, the traditional mathematical approach of NMB must be rearranged to comply with this administrative requirement. METHODS: In this report, we describe how the classic equations of NMB should be modified to achieve this purpose. The mathematical principle of proportionality, which is typical of the ICER, must be replaced by the principle of mathematical additivity, which is typical of NMB. Furthermore, to rearrange the scale of benefits according to the NMB, an estimate is needed of the minimum acceptable benefit converted into monetary units, which is associated with 0 in the benefit scale. RESULTS: A detailed example is presented to explain the practical application of these mathematical equations. These equations are widely applicable in the field of implantable devices. CONCLUSION: Since the expenditure for medical devices in European hospitals is close to that of hospital medicines, tenders for the in-hospital procurement of devices may represent a decisive tool to manage sustainability and ensure access to innovation. In this context, the methodology for managing clinical outcomes through tenders requires a specific mathematical approach that we have described in the present article.
Keywords:
health economics; incremental cost-effectiveness ratio; medical devices; net monetary benefit; tender