Literature DB >> 9520961

Assessing the value of a new pharmaceutical. A feasibility study of contingent valuation in managed care.

B J O'Brien1, R Goeree, A Gafni, G W Torrance, M V Pauly, H Erder, J Rusthoven, J Weeks, M Cahill, B LaMont.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The authors assessed the feasibility and construct validity of the contingent valuation method for measuring the monetary value to healthy enrollees in a health maintenance organization of a new drug, filgrastim, as prophylaxis against febrile neutropenia after chemotherapy treatment for cancer.
METHODS: A random sample of 220 enrollees from a closed-panel staff-model health maintenance organization who did not have cancer were interviewed. Chemotherapy, febrile neutropenia and filgrastim were described by video and decision board. Questions were asked in two different scenarios: (1) User-based: Assuming they were at the point of consumption and about to receive chemotherapy, what is the maximum they would be willing to pay to receive filgrastim? and (2) Insurance-based: Given they were at risk of cancer in the future, what is the maximum they would be willing to pay in additional monthly insurance premiums to add filgrastim to the plan? In a second insurance scenario where respondents were told that filgrastim was covered, what is the minimum reduction in premium that persons were willing to accept to relinquish coverage of the drug? A 2 x 2 factorial design was used to contrast two bidding algorithms to test for starting point bias and two 5-yearly prior risks of cancer, 1/200 versus 1/100. Main effects were tested by ANCOVA controlling for age, sex, health, and income.
RESULTS: Demographics of experimental cells were similar. No evidence was found of significant starting point bias. For user-based questions, as expected, willingness-to-pay increases with febrile neutropenia risk reduction, but at a declining marginal rate. Despite careful presentation of information to respondents, willingness-to-pay for insurance was higher in the lower prior risk group. Consistent with previous contingent valuation studies, the authors of the present study found evidence that willingness-to-accept exceeds willingness-to-pay for coverage of the same benefit.
CONCLUSIONS: An insurance-based contingent valuation study is feasible in a health maintenance organization. Construct validation evidence was encouraging, with the exception of the test for prior risk of cancer; however, this was a between-person contrast and may have been confounded by other factors.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9520961     DOI: 10.1097/00005650-199803000-00013

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Care        ISSN: 0025-7079            Impact factor:   2.983


  26 in total

Review 1.  Willingness to pay and the valuation of programmes for the prevention and control of influenza.

Authors:  S Birch; A Gafni; B O'Brien
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 2.  Benefit valuation in economic evaluation of cancer therapies. A systematic review of the published literature.

Authors:  J Brown; M Sculpher
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 4.981

3.  Willingness to pay. What's in a name?

Authors:  A Gafni
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 4.  Willingness to pay as a measure of health benefits.

Authors:  M V Bala; J A Mauskopf; L L Wood
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 4.981

5.  Assessing willingness to pay for cancer prevention.

Authors:  Michael A Milligan; Alok K Bohara; José A Pagán
Journal:  Int J Health Care Finance Econ       Date:  2010-07-16

6.  Willingness-to-pay to prevent Alzheimer's disease: a contingent valuation approach.

Authors:  Rashmita Basu
Journal:  Int J Health Care Finance Econ       Date:  2013-08-31

Review 7.  A 'league table' of contingent valuation results for pharmaceutical interventions: a hard pill to swallow?

Authors:  Tracey H Sach; Richard D Smith; David K Whynes
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

8.  To fund or not to fund: development of a decision-making framework for the coverage of new health technologies.

Authors:  Tania Stafinski; Devidas Menon; Christopher McCabe; Donald J Philippon
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.981

9.  The cost of laparoscopic myotomy versus pneumatic dilatation for esophageal achalasia.

Authors:  Paul J Karanicolas; Shona E Smith; Richard I Inculet; Richard A Malthaner; Richard P Reynolds; Ron Goeree; Amiram Gafni
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2007-05-04       Impact factor: 4.584

10.  Conjoint analysis of a new Chemotherapy: willingness to pay and preference for the features of raltitrexed versus standard therapy in advanced Colorectal Cancer.

Authors:  Mike Aristides; Jack Chen; Mark Schulz; Eve Williamson; Stephen Clarke; Kaye Grant
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.