Rationalising rationing: economic and other considerations in the debate about funding of Viagra

Risk preferences over health: Empirical estimates and implications for medical decision-making

Mainstream health economic theory implies that an expected gain in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) produces the same value for consumers, regardless of baseline health. Several strands of recent research call this implication into question. Generalized Risk-Adjusted Cost-Effectiveness (GRACE) demonstrates theoretically that baseline health status influences value, so long as consumers are not risk-neutral over health. Prior empirical literature casts doubt on risk-neutral expected utility-maximization in the health domain. We estimate utility over HRQoL in a nationally representative U.S. population and use our estimates to measure risk preferences over health. We find that individuals are risk-seeking at low levels of health, become risk-averse at health equal to 0.485 (measured on a 0-1 scale), and are most risk-averse at perfect health (coefficient of relative risk aversion = 4.51). We develop the resulting implications for medical decision making, cost-effectiveness analyses, and the proper theory of health-related decision making under uncertainty.

Reference-dependent age weighting of quality-adjusted life years

People do not only care about maximizing health gains but also about their distribution. For example, they give more weight to younger patients than older patients. This pilot study aims to investigate if age weighting is reinforced by loss aversion if young people are falling behind one's perceived 'normal' quality of life (QoL), while older people do not. We apply a person trade-off method in a large representative sample (n = 990) to estimate age weighting factors. We also measure QoL levels that individuals regard as 'normal' for different ages, serving as reference points. We observe a considerable amount of age weighting, with 20-year-old patients on average receiving 1.7 times as much weight as 80-year-old patients. Perceived 'normal' QoL rapidly decreases with age of a patient. Older people are more optimistic about what constitutes 'normal QoL' than younger people, but they express a faster decline in normal QoL due to aging. Respondents who view all improvements to be gain enlarging show the least age weighting, but loss aversion cannot explain the results. Still, one's age-related reference level is an important predictor of age weights. Given the explorative nature of this study, further studies are called for to generate more robust evidence.

EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L proxy report: psychometric performance and agreement with self-report

BACKGROUND

Self-report is the standard for measuring people's health-related quality of life (HRQoL), including children. However, in certain circumstances children cannot report their own health. For this reason, children's HRQoL measures often provide both a self-report and a proxy-report form. It is not clear whether the measurement properties will be the same for these two forms. We investigated whether it would be beneficial to extend the classification system of the EQ-5D-Y proxy questionnaire from 3 to 5 response levels. The agreement between self-report and proxy-report was assessed for both EQ-5D-Y measures.

METHODS

The study included 286 pediatric patients and their caregivers as proxies. At three consecutive measurements-baseline, test-retest and follow-up-the proxies assessed the child's HRQoL using the EQ-5D-Y-3L, EQ-5D-Y-5L, the PedsQL Generic, and matched disease-specific instruments. The proxy versions of EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L were compared in terms of feasibility, distribution properties, convergent validity, test-retest and responsiveness. Agreement between both EQ-5D-Y proxy versions to their respective self-report versions was assessed at baseline and follow-up.

RESULTS

The proportion of missing responses was 1% for the EQ-5D-Y-3L and 1.4% for the EQ-5D-Y-5L. The frequency of health state with no problems in all dimensions (11111) was slightly lower for the EQ-5D-Y-5L (21.3% vs 16.7%). Regarding the convergent validity with the PedsQL and disease-specific measures, the proxy versions of EQ-5D-Y-3L and EQ-5D-Y-5L had similar magnitudes of associations between similar dimensions. The means of test-retest coefficients between the two versions of the EQ-5D-Y proxy were comparable (0.83 vs. 0.84). Regarding reported improved conditions, responsiveness of the EQ-5D-Y-5L proxy (26.6-54.1%) was higher than that of the EQ-5D-Y-3L proxy (20.7-46.4%). Except for acutely ill patients, agreement between the EQ-5D-Y-5L proxy and self-reports was at least moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

Extending the number of levels of the proxy version of EQ-5D-Y can improve the classification accuracy and the ability to detect health changes over time. The level structure of EQ-5D-Y-5L was associated with a closer agreement between proxy and self-report. The study findings support extending the EQ-5D-Y descriptive system from 3 to 5 levels when administered by a proxy, which is often the case in the pediatric population.

Necessity under construction - societal weighing rationality in the appraisal of health care technologies

Health care coverage decisions may employ many different considerations, which are brought together across two phases. The assessment phase examines the available scientific evidence, such as the cost-effectiveness, of the technology. The appraisal then contextualises this evidence to arrive at an (advised) coverage decision, but little is known about how this is done.In the Netherlands, the appraisal is set up to achieve a societal weighing and is the primary place where need- and solidarity-related ('necessity') argumentations are used. To elucidate how the Dutch appraisal committee 'constructs necessity', we analysed observations and recordings of two appraisal committee meetings at the National Health Care Institute, the corresponding documents (five), and interviews with committee members and policy makers (13 interviewees in 12 interviews), with attention to specific necessity argumentations.The Dutch appraisal committee constructs necessity in four phases: (1) allowing explicit criteria to steer the process; (2) allowing patient (representative) contributions to challenge the process; (3) bringing new argumentations in from outside and weaving them together; and (4) formulating recommendations to societal stakeholders. We argue that in these ways, the appraisal committee achieves societal weighing rationality, as the committee actively uses argumentations from society and embeds the decision outcome in society.

Around the Tables - Contextual Factors in Healthcare Coverage Decisions Across Western Europe

Background: Across Western Europe, procedures and formalised criteria for taking decisions on the coverage (inclusion in the benefits basket or equivalent) of healthcare technologies vary substantially. In the decision documents, which display the justification of, the rationale for, these decisions, national healthcare institutes may employ ‘contextual factors,’ defined here as situation-specific considerations. Little is known about how the use of such contextual factors compares across countries. We describe and compare contextual factors as used in coverage decisions generally and 4 decision documents specifically in Belgium, England, Germany, and the Netherlands.

Methods: Four group interviews with 3 experts from the national healthcare institute of each country, document and web site analysis, and a workshop with 1 to 2 of these experts per country were followed by the examination of the documents of 4 specific decisions taken in each of the 4 countries, sampled to vary widely in type of technology and decision outcome.

Results: From the available decision documents, we conclude that in every country studied, contextual factors are established ‘around the table,’ ie, in deliberation. All documents examined feature contextual factors, with similar contextual factor patterns leading to similar decisions in different countries. The Dutch decisions employ the widest variety of factors, with the exception of the societal functioning of the patient, which is relatively common in Belgium, England, and Germany. Half of the final decisions were taken in another setting, with the consequence that no documentation was retrievable for 2 decisions.

Conclusion: First, we conclude that in these countries, contextual factors are actively integrated in the decision document, and that this is achieved in deliberation. Conceptualising contextual factors as both situation-specific and actively-integrated affords insight into practices of contextualisation and provides an encouragement for exchange between decision-makers on more qualitative aspects of decisions. Second, the decisions that lacked a publicly accessible justification of the final decision document raised questions on the decisions’ legitimacy. Further research could address patterning of contextual factors, elucidate why some factors may remain implicit, and how decisions without a publicly available decision document may enable or restrain decision-making practice.

The pharmacist's role in improving the treatment of erectile dysfunction and its underlying causes

Erectile dysfunction (ED), which worldwide is likely to affect in excess of 300 million men by 2025, is often either untreated or insufficiently treated. It can be a prelude to other serious illnesses and may be a cause or consequence of depression in affected individuals. Among men younger than 60 years of age, ED can be a robust early-stage indicator of vascular disease and type 2 diabetes. Untreated or inadequately treated ED can also be a sign of poor communication between health professionals and service users of all ages. Improved treatment of ED could cost-effectively prevent premature deaths and avoidable morbidity. The extension of community pharmacy‒based health care would enable more men living with ED to safely access effective medications, along with appropriate diagnostic services and support for beneficial lifestyle changes such as smoking cessation in conveniently accessible settings. The task of introducing improved methods of affordably addressing problems linked to ED exemplifies the strategic challenges now facing health care systems globally. Promoting professionally supported self-care in pharmacies has the potential to meet the needs of aging populations in progressively more effective ways.

The bare necessities? A realist review of necessity argumentations used in health care coverage decisions

CONTEXT

Policy makers and insurance companies decide on coverage of care by both calculating (cost-) effectiveness and assessing the necessity of coverage.

AIM

To investigate argumentations pertaining to necessity used in coverage decisions made by policy makers and insurance companies, as well as those argumentations used by patients, authors, the public and the media.

METHODS

This study is designed as a realist review, adhering to the RAMESES quality standards. Embase, Medline and Web of Science were searched and 98 articles were included that detailed necessity-based argumentations.

RESULTS

We identified twenty necessity-based argumentation types. Seven are only used to argue in favour of coverage, five solely for arguing against coverage, and eight are used to argue both ways. A positive decision appears to be facilitated when patients or the public set the decision on the agenda. Moreover, half the argumentation types are only used by patients, authors, the public and the media, whereas the other half is also used by policy makers and insurance companies. The latter group is more accepted and used in more different countries.

CONCLUSION

The majority of necessity-based argumentation types is used for either favouring or opposing coverage, and not for both. Patients, authors, the public and the media use a broader repertoire of argumentation types than policy makers and insurance companies.

Evidence-based policy as reflexive practice. What can we learn from evidence-based medicine?

The call for evidence-based policy is often accompanied by rather uncritical references to the success of evidence-based medicine, leading to often unsuccessful translation attempts. In this paper, I reflect on the practice of evidence-based medicine in an attempt to sketch a more productive approach to translating evidence into the practice of policy making. Discussing three episodes in the history of evidence-based medicine - clinical trials, and the production and use of clinical guidelines - I conclude that the success of evidence-based medicine is based on the creation of reflexive practices in which evidence and practice can be combined productively. In the conclusion, I discuss the prospects of such a practice for evidence-based policy.

Are all health gains equally important? An exploration of acceptable health as a reference point in health care priority setting

Background

Accumulating evidence suggests that members of society prefer some QALY gains over others. In this paper, we explore the notion of acceptable health as a reference point in assessing the value of health gains. The value of health benefits may be assessed in terms of their position relative to this reference level, benefits above the level of acceptable health being valued differently from benefits below this level. In this paper we focus on assessing the level of acceptable health at different ages and associations with background variables.

Methods

We recruited a sample of the adult population from the Netherlands (n = 1067) to investigate which level of health problems they consider to be acceptable for people aged 40 to 90, using 10-year intervals. We constructed acceptable health curves and associated acceptable health with background characteristics using linear regressions.

Results

The results of this study indicate that the level of health problems considered acceptable increases with age. This level was associated with respondents’ age, age of death of next of kin, health and health behaviour.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that people are capable of indicating acceptable levels of health at different ages, implying that a reference point of acceptable health may exist. While more investigation into the measurement of acceptable health remains necessary, future studies may also focus on how health gains may be valued relative to this reference level. Gains below the reference point may receive higher weight than those above this level since the former improve unacceptable health states while the latter improve acceptable health states.

The evaluation of lifestyle interventions in the Netherlands

Current investments in preventive lifestyle interventions are relatively low, despite the significant impact of unhealthy behaviour on population health. This raises the question of whether the criteria used in reimbursement decisions about healthcare interventions put preventive interventions at a disadvantage. In this paper, we highlight the decision-making framework used in the Netherlands to delineate the basic benefits package. Important criteria in that framework are ‘necessity’ and ‘cost-effectiveness’. Several normative choices need to be made, and these choices can have an important impact on the evaluation of lifestyle interventions, especially when making these criteria operational and quantifiable. Moreover, the implementation of the decision-making framework may prove to be difficult for lifestyle interventions. Improvements of the decision-making framework in the Netherlands are required to guarantee sound evaluations of lifestyle interventions aimed at improving health.

A test of independence of discounting from quality of life

The quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) model assumes quality and quantity of life can be multiplied into a single index and requires quality and quantity to be mutually independent, which need not hold empirically. This paper proposes a new test for measuring independence of utility of life duration from quality of life in a riskless setting. We use a large representative sample of Dutch citizens and include two health states generally considered better than dead (BTD) and one health state considered worse than dead (WTD). Independence cannot be rejected when comparing the BTD health states, but is rejected when comparing the BTD states with the WTD state. In particular, utility of life duration becomes more concave for the WTD state. This may suggest that independence holds only for BTD health states. This has implications for the QALY model and would require using sign-dependent utility of life duration functions.

Individual responsibility for what? – A conceptual framework for exploring the suitability of private financing in a publicly funded health-care system

Policymakers in publicly funded health-care systems are frequently required to make intricate decisions on which health-care services to include or exclude from the basic health-care package. Although it seems likely that the concept of individual responsibility is an essential feature of such decisions, it is rarely explicitly articulated or evaluated in health policy. This paper presents a tentative conceptual framework for exploring when health-care services contain characteristics that facilitate individual responsibility through private financing. Six attributes for exploring the suitability of private financing for specific health-care commodities are identified: (i) it should enable individuals to value the need and quality both before and after utilization; (ii) it should be targeted toward individuals with a reasonable level of individual autonomy; (iii) it should be associated with low levels of positive externalities; (iv) it should be associated with a demand sufficient to generate a private market; (v) it should be associated with payments affordable for most individuals; and finally, (vi) it should be associated with ‘lifestyle enhancements’ rather than ‘medical necessities’. The tentative framework enables exploration of individual responsibility connected to health care as a heterogeneous group of commodities, and allows policymakers to make decisions on rationing by design rather than default.

The NHS as an insurer

The National Health Service (NHS) in England is not only a commissioner and provider of health care to the sick, but also offers certainty and peace of mind to all citizens--even those who do not use the health service in any year. However, due to the recent dominance of cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis as the central factors determining resource allocation decisions in the NHS, this second role--which we term its 'insurance value'--has increasingly become neglected. In this paper, we argue that this inattention is detrimental to the population at large. We explore some implications to the NHS of maximizing insurance value. These include requiring commissioners to take explicit account of how denial of service undermines peace of mind; requiring the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) to calculate not just the health benefits, but also the peace of mind benefits of health technologies; and establishing a formal NHS 'insurance regulator' analogous to the Financial Ombudsman Service. Insurance value should be a guiding principle for NHS decision-makers.

Finding legitimacy for the role of budget impact in drug reimbursement decisions

OBJECTIVES

Research has shown that effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and severity of illness each play a role in drug reimbursement decisions. However, the role of budget impact in such decisions is less obvious. Policy makers almost always demand a budget impact estimate yet seem reluctant to formally include budget impact as a rationing criterion. Health economists even reject budget impact as a legitimate criterion. For these reasons, it is important to examine its use in rationing decisions, and rationales underlying its use.

METHODS

We trace several rationales supporting the use of budget impact through a literature review, supplemented by semistructured interviews with eleven key stakeholders involved in drug reimbursement decisions in the Netherlands.

RESULTS

Budget impact arguments are used in certain instances, although policy makers appear uncomfortable with its use because well described rationales still are lacking. In addition, we identify the following rationales to support budget impact as a rationing criterion: opportunity costs, loss aversion, uncertainty and equal opportunity.

CONCLUSIONS

Budget impact plays a role in drug reimbursement decisions and has rationales to support its use. However, policy makers do not easily admit that they consider budget impact and are even reluctant to explicitly use budget impact as a formal criterion. A debate would strengthen the theoretical foundation of budget impact as a legitimate criterion in the context of drug reimbursement decisions. Such discussion of budget impact's role will also enhance policy-makers' accountability.

Cost-utility analysis in educational needs assessment

Educational needs assessments (hereafter NAs) are inattentive to cost considerations and are frequently dominated by elite stakeholder groups. In this article I make a case for adopting a cost-utility approach, illustrating the argument with data generated in a NA of central library services in a Canadian school district. Using survey data from eight stakeholder groups, I found that (1) NAs based on the service preferences of a single stakeholder group can be misleading; (2) service preferences can be integrated into a single set of priorities, even when there are disagreements, by using the stakeholder group as the unit of analysis and assigning weights that privilege input from knowledgeable respondents; and (3) that the ranking of service operations produced by user preferences was not significantly correlated with the ranking produced by integrating preferences with costs. Cost-utility analysis would be more helpful if the utilities represented rigorously determined benefits of the services assessed, as well as stakeholder perceptions of the value of these benefits. Cost-utility analysis in NA will not reach its potential until cost considerations are routinely included in educational program evaluations.

The greatest happiness of the greatest number? Policy actors' perspectives on the limits of economic evaluation as a tool for informing health care coverage decisions in Thailand

Background

This paper presents qualitative findings from an assessment of the acceptability of using economic evaluation among policy actors in Thailand. Using cost-utility data from two economic analyses a hypothetical case scenario was created in which policy actors had to choose between two competing interventions to include in a public health benefit package. The two competing interventions, laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for gallbladder disease versus renal dialysis for chronic renal disease, were selected because they highlighted conflicting criteria influencing the allocation of healthcare resources.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 36 policy actors who play a major role in resource allocation decisions within the Thai healthcare system. These included 14 policy makers at the national level, five hospital directors, ten health professionals and seven academics.

Results

Twenty six out of 36 (72%) respondents were not convinced by the presentation of economic evaluation findings and chose not to support the inclusion of a proven cost-effective intervention (LC) in the benefit package due to ethical, institutional and political considerations. There were only six respondents, including three policy makers at national level, one hospital director, one health professional and one academic, (6/36, 17%) whose decisions were influenced by economic evaluation evidence.

Conclusion

This paper illustrates limitations of using economic evaluation information in decision making priorities of health care, perceived by different policy actors. It demonstrates that the concept of maximising health utility fails to recognise other important societal values in making health resource allocation decisions.

Strengthening the status of psychotherapy for personality disorders: an integrated perspective on effects and costs

OBJECTIVE

Despite scientific evidence of effectiveness, psychotherapy for personality disorders is not yet fully deployed, nor is its reimbursement self-evident. Both clinicians and health care policy-makers increasingly rely on evidence-based medicine and health economics when determining a treatment of choice and reimbursement. This article aims to contribute to that understanding by applying these criteria on psychotherapy as a treatment for patients with personality disorder.

METHOD

We have evaluated the available empirical evidence on effectiveness and cost-effectiveness, and integrated this with necessity of treatment as a moderating factor.

RESULTS

The effectiveness of psychotherapy for personality disorders is well documented with favourable randomized trial results, 2 metaanalyses, and a Cochrane review. However, the evidence does not yet fully live up to modern standards of evidence-based medicine and is mostly limited to borderline and avoidant personality disorders. Data on cost-effectiveness suggest that psychotherapy for personality disorders may lead to cost-savings. However, state-of-the-art cost-effectiveness data are still scarce. An encouraging factor is that the available studies indicate that patients with personality disorder experience a high burden of disease, stressing the necessity of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

When applying an integrated vision on outcome, psychotherapy can be considered not only an effective treatment for patients with personality disorder but also most likely a cost-effective and necessary intervention. However, more state-of-the-art research is required before clinicians and health care policy-makers can fully appreciate the benefits of psychotherapy for personality disorders. Considerable progress is possible if researchers focus their efforts on evidence-based medicine and cost-effectiveness research.

Patient access to pharmaceuticals: an international comparison

We have identified eight sub-dimensions of patient access to pharmaceuticals: marketing approvals, time of marketing approval, coverage, cost sharing, conditions of reimbursement, speed from marketing approval to reimbursement, extent to which beneficiaries control choice of their drug benefit, and evenness of the availability of drugs to the population. For a sample of commonly used best-selling drugs in the United States (US), we measured these eight access sub-dimensions across four health systems: France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom (UK), and the US. Although the US approved between 15 and 18% more drugs than the other three countries, the US was slower than France and the UK to approve drugs licensed in all four countries. The percentage of drugs covered is approximately the same for all four countries. For covered drugs, we observe the least cost sharing by patients in the Netherlands. The Netherlands imposes conditions of reimbursement on a much larger percentage of drugs. France seems to be the slowest in respect of speed from marketing approval to reimbursement. The US is the most flexible in terms of the extent to which beneficiaries control their choice of drug benefit but it is the least universal in terms of evenness of the availability of drugs to the population. Our study confirms the frequently cited problems of access in European countries: lag between marketing approval and reimbursement, and inflexibility in respect of the extent to which beneficiaries control their choice of drug benefit. At the same time, our study confirms, qualitatively, different kinds of access problems in the US: relatively high patient cost sharing for pharmaceuticals, and wide variation in coverage.

The increasingly complex fourth hurdle for pharmaceuticals

There are three known criteria that underlie drug reimbursement decisions: therapeutic value, cost effectiveness and burden of disease. However, evidence from recent reimbursement decisions in several jurisdictions points to residual unexplained variables, one of which may be budget impact. An economic rationale for carrying out budget impact analyses is opportunity cost, measured by the economic benefits foregone by using resources in one way rather than another. Under certain assumptions, cost-effectiveness analysis accounts for opportunity cost while conveying to the decision maker the price of maximising health gains, subject to a budget constraint. However, the underlying assumptions are implausible, particularly in the context of pharmaceutical care. Although drugs that are cost effective may lead to unambiguous health gains among patient groups for whom the drugs are indicated, the opportunity costs could conceivably lead to a reduction in aggregate health gains, or failure to meet different kinds of equity considerations. The pertinent policy question is where to find the resources to fund new innovations, such as cost-effective pharmaceuticals, or drugs targeting severe diseases. It may be a matter of redeployment of resources across healthcare sectors, cancelling the funding of (older) pharmaceuticals that are less cost effective, or delisting drugs that are cost effective but target less burdensome conditions.

A systematic review of economic evaluation literature in Thailand: are the data good enough to be used by policy-makers?

In many countries, including Thailand, there is an increasing impetus to use economic evaluation to allow more explicit and transparent healthcare priority setting. However, an important question for policy makers in low- and middle-income countries is whether it is appropriate and feasible to introduce economic evaluation data into healthcare priority-setting decisions. In addition to ethical, social and political issues, information supply challenges need to be addressed. This paper systematically reviewed the literature on economic evaluation of health technology in Thailand published between 1982 and 2005. Its aim was to analyse the quantity, quality and targeting of economic evaluation studies that can provide a framework for those conducting similar reviews in other settings. The review revealed that, although the number of publications reporting economic evaluations has increased significantly in recent years, serious attention needs to be given to the quality of reporting and analysis. Furthermore, there is an absence of economic evaluation publications for 15 of the top 20 major health problems in Thailand, indicating a poor distribution of research resources towards the determination of cost-effective interventions for diminishing the disease burden of certain major health problems. If economic evaluation is only useful for policy makers when performed correctly and reported accurately, these findings depict information barriers to using economic evaluation to assist health decision-making processes in Thailand.

A dollar is a dollar is a dollar--or is it?

It is normally stated that an economic evaluation should take the societal perspective and that this implies the incorporation of all costs and effects, regardless of where these occur. Nevertheless, this broad perspective may be in conflict with the narrower perspective of the health-care decision-makers we are usually trying to aid. In this article, it is argued that not all costs have to be considered equally important for health-care decision-making and that there is a discrepancy between the economically preferred societal perspective and the aim of aiding health-care decision-makers. This is related to the concept of local rationality. Three reasons why some costs may be considered more important for health-care decision-makers than others are: 1) relevance; 2) equity; and 3) responsibility. We suggest that it may be useful to adopt a two-perspective approach as a standard, presenting one cost-effectiveness ratio following a strict health-care perspective and one following the common societal perspective. The health-care perspective may assist the health-care policymaker better in achieving health-care goals, while the societal perspective indicates whether the local rationality of the narrow health-care perspective is also in line with societal optimality. More research on actual decisions should provide more insight into the relative weights attached to different types of costs.

The role of the 'lifestyle' label and negative bias in the allocation of health resources for erectile dysfunction drugs: an ethics-based appraisal

There have been recent calls for the re-evaluation of health resource allocation for erectile dysfunction (ED) drugs. This paper discusses sociocultural prejudices associated with ED and its treatment, arising from the link with sexuality, the perception that ED is a 'lifestyle' issue and the belief that ED is part of the normal ageing process. These views diminish the perceived importance of sexual health, extending subjectively into the funding arena as a 'negative bias'. Empirical data are presented, which demonstrate that ED can have significant psychosocial consequences, and that ED drugs are valuable quality-of-life interventions. The assumption that ED is an inevitable part of ageing is also analysed and found to be questionable. Health resource allocation decisions for ED drugs must be conducted with an awareness of the ethical and clinical complexities described in this paper, and with the sensibility that negative personal value judgments (on the part of policymakers) must be guarded against.

Gesundheitsökonomie und HTA

For a comprehensive health technology assessment (HTA), health economic studies are analysed as well as medical studies. Significance and effects of HTA are rather different in European countries. In Germany HTA is conducted by two official agencies: DIMDI and IQWiG. While DIMDI requires health economic assessments, IQWiG is prohibited from considering economic aspects by law (pure assessment of benefits). For the health economic assessment in HTA reports mainly secondary scientific evidence is exploited, i.e. primarily cost effectiveness and cost utility analyses. The study perspective, the study alternatives and the modelling methods are of great importance for the evaluation and have to be justified in depth. The cost effectiveness ratio and the budget impact are the most important results of the health economic assessment, which is the basis for the appraisal by the health care authorities. For this decision medical, utilitarian or other aspects like the avoidance of unwanted distribution effects are considered. On the other hand often only a few studies are available for the decision making when the appraisal has to be done. This problem might be less relevant in the near future as the number of HTAs and the number of health economic evaluations increases.

Acceptability of less than perfect health states

Health normally deteriorates beyond a certain age. This means, in Amartya Sen's terms, that one's health capabilities decline beyond a certain age, making it more difficult to achieve functionings such as mobility or sexual activity. In this paper, we investigate whether this normal reduction in quality of life also induces less than perfect health states to be considered acceptable at advanced stages of life. In other words, we investigate whether it is considered acceptable that health capabilities decline over time. In this study, we use domain-specific descriptions of health (mostly following the EQ-5D domains) in order to investigate whether the acceptability of less than perfect health states is similar for all types of health losses. Besides a theoretical consideration of this issue, we present some empirical evidence based on the answers of 226 respondents to a web-based survey. The results show that often individuals do indeed consider less than perfect health states acceptable, especially at more advanced stages of life. Mild health problems are more often considered acceptable than severe health problems. The acceptability of health states is related to the quality of life score of these states, i.e., worse states are considered less acceptable. This may have implications for the allocation of scarce health care resources.

Introducing economic evaluation as a policy tool in Korea: will decision makers get quality information? : a critical review of published Korean economic evaluations

Interest in the use of economic evaluations in Korea as an aid for healthcare decision makers has been growing rapidly since the financial crisis of the Korean National Health Insurance fund and the separation in 2000 of the roles of prescribing and dispensing drugs. The Korean Health Insurance Review Agency (HIRA) is considering making it mandatory for pharmaceutical companies to submit the results of an economic evaluation when demanding reimbursement of new pharmaceuticals. The usefulness of the results of economic evaluations depends highly on the quality of the studies. The purpose of this paper, therefore, is to provide a critical review of economic evaluations of healthcare technologies published in the Korean context. Our results show that many studies did not meet international standards. Study designs were suboptimal, study perspectives and types were often stated incompletely, time periods were often too short, and outcome measures were often less than ideal. In addition, some articles did not distinguish between measurement and valuation of resource use. Capital, overhead and productivity costs were often omitted. Only half of the studies performed sensitivity analyses. In order to further rationalise resource allocation in the Korean healthcare sector, the quality of the information provided through economic evaluations needs to improve. Developing clear guidelines and educating and training researchers in performing economic evaluations is necessary.

Decision makers’ views on health care objectives and budget constraints: results from a pilot study

Economic evaluations aim to inform policy makers about the costs and effects of medical interventions to support their decisions on the allocation of health care resources. Decision makers combine information on cost-effectiveness with their preferences and with possible constraints for the allocation of health care resources. That is, decision makers need to specify an optimality criterion and all possible (budget) constraints. Usually this is a more or less implicit process. The aim of our pilot study was to find out whether decision makers consider the objectives and budget constraints we selected for a theoretical model of resource allocation relevant, and to set priorities for these objectives.

Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: how are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge?

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of health-care systems, both public and private, such as managed-care organizations, are adopting results from cost-effectiveness (CE) analysis as one of the measures to inform decisions on allocation of health-care resources. It is expected that thresholds for CE ratios may be established for the acceptance of reimbursement or formulary listing.

OBJECTIVE

This paper provides an overview of the development of and debate on CE thresholds, reviews threshold figures (i.e., cost per unit of health gain) currently proposed for or applied to resource-allocation decisions, and explores how thresholds may emerge.

DISCUSSION

At the time of this review, there is no evidence from the literature that any health-care system has yet implemented explicit CE ratio thresholds. The fact that some government agencies have utilized results from CE analysis in pricing/reimbursement decisions allows for retrospective analysis of the consistency of these decisions. As CE analysis becomes more widely utilized in assisting health-care decision-making, this may cause decision-makers to become increasingly consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

When CE analysis is conducted, well-established methodology should be used and transparency should be ensured. CE thresholds are expected to emerge in many countries, driven by the need for transparent and consistent decision-making. Future thresholds will likely be higher in most high-income countries than currently cited rules of thumb.

Reconciliation of economic concerns and health policy: illustration of an equity adjustment procedure using proportional shortfall

Economic evaluations have become an important and much used tool in aiding decision makers in deciding on reimbursement or implementation of new healthcare technologies. Nevertheless, the impact of economic evaluations on reimbursement decisions has been modest; results of economic evaluations do not have a good record in predicting funding decisions. This is usually explained in terms of fairness; there is increasing awareness that valuations of QALYs may differ when the QALYs accrue to different patients. The problem, however, is that these equity concerns often remain implicit, and therefore frustrate explicitness and transparency in evidence-based decision making. It has been suggested that a so-called equity adjustment procedure may (partially) solve this problem. Typically this would involve the application of so-called equity weights, which can be used to recalculate the value of QALY gains for different patients. This paper explores such an equity adjustment procedure, using the equity concept of proportional shortfall. Proportional shortfall assumes that measurement of inequalities in health should concentrate on the fraction of QALYs that people lose relative to their remaining life expectancy, and not on the absolute number of QALYs lost or gained. It is the ratio of QALYs lost over the QALYs remaining. This equity concept combines elements of two popular but conflicting notions of equity: fair innings and severity-of-illness. We applied the concept of proportional shortfall to ten conditions and tentatively explored how an equity adjustment procedure using proportional shortfall might affect priority setting. Our equity adjustment procedure lowered the cost-effectiveness threshold when a condition was relatively mild. Because the proportional shortfall caused by the ten conditions differed considerably, the equity-adjustment procedure discriminated strongly between the ten conditions, and this experiment provided a good opportunity to explore the impact of equity adjustment for healthcare reimbursement decisions. In conclusion, our results suggest that equity can be measured and that integration of equity concerns into an economic evaluation improves the fit between economic models and reimbursement decisions. It is recommended that cost-effectiveness driven health policy systems consider equity adjustments.