Cost-effectiveness thresholds: methods for setting and examples from around the world

André Soares Santos, Augusto Afonso Guerra Júnior, Brian Godman, Alec Morton, Cristina Mariano Ruas Brandão

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) are used to judge if an intervention represents sufficient value for money to merit adoption in healthcare systems. The study was motivated by the Brazilian context of HTA, where meetings are being conducted to decide on the definition of a threshold. AREAS COVERED: An electronic search was conducted on Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via BVS) and ScienceDirect followed by a complementary search of references of included studies, Google Scholar and conference abstracts. Cost-effectiveness thresholds are usually calculated through three different approaches: the willingness-to-pay, representative of welfare economics; the precedent method, based on the value of an already funded technology; and the opportunity cost method, which links the threshold to the volume of health displaced. An explicit threshold has never been formally adopted in most places. Some countries have defined thresholds, with some flexibility to consider other factors. An implicit threshold could be determined by research of funded cases. EXPERT COMMENTARY: CETs have had an important role as a “bridging concept” between the world of academic research and the “real world” of healthcare prioritization. The definition of a cost-effectiveness threshold is paramount for the construction of a transparent and efficient Health Technology Assessment system.
LanguageEnglish
Pages277-288
Number of pages18
JournalExpert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research
Volume18
Issue number3
Early online date27 Feb 2018
DOIs
StatePublished - 11 Jun 2018

Fingerprint

Cost-Benefit Analysis
Delivery of Health Care
Biomedical Technology Assessment
Research
PubMed
Economics
Technology
Costs and Cost Analysis
Cost-effectiveness
Health

Keywords

  • cost-benefit analysis
  • cost-effectiveness analysis
  • medical economics
  • pharmaceutical economics
  • expert testimony
  • technology assessment
  • biomedical

Cite this

Santos, André Soares ; Guerra Júnior, Augusto Afonso ; Godman, Brian ; Morton, Alec ; Brandão, Cristina Mariano Ruas. / Cost-effectiveness thresholds : methods for setting and examples from around the world. In: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research. 2018 ; Vol. 18, No. 3. pp. 277-288
@article{2db8942715bf49e69758668ec8fe724b,
title = "Cost-effectiveness thresholds: methods for setting and examples from around the world",
abstract = "INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) are used to judge if an intervention represents sufficient value for money to merit adoption in healthcare systems. The study was motivated by the Brazilian context of HTA, where meetings are being conducted to decide on the definition of a threshold. AREAS COVERED: An electronic search was conducted on Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via BVS) and ScienceDirect followed by a complementary search of references of included studies, Google Scholar and conference abstracts. Cost-effectiveness thresholds are usually calculated through three different approaches: the willingness-to-pay, representative of welfare economics; the precedent method, based on the value of an already funded technology; and the opportunity cost method, which links the threshold to the volume of health displaced. An explicit threshold has never been formally adopted in most places. Some countries have defined thresholds, with some flexibility to consider other factors. An implicit threshold could be determined by research of funded cases. EXPERT COMMENTARY: CETs have had an important role as a “bridging concept” between the world of academic research and the “real world” of healthcare prioritization. The definition of a cost-effectiveness threshold is paramount for the construction of a transparent and efficient Health Technology Assessment system.",
keywords = "cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, medical economics, pharmaceutical economics, expert testimony, technology assessment, biomedical",
author = "Santos, {Andr{\'e} Soares} and {Guerra J{\'u}nior}, {Augusto Afonso} and Brian Godman and Alec Morton and Brand{\~a}o, {Cristina Mariano Ruas}",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
day = "11",
doi = "10.1080/14737167.2018.1443810",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "277--288",
journal = "Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research",
issn = "1473-7167",
number = "3",

}

Cost-effectiveness thresholds : methods for setting and examples from around the world. / Santos, André Soares; Guerra Júnior, Augusto Afonso; Godman, Brian; Morton, Alec; Brandão, Cristina Mariano Ruas.

In: Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research, Vol. 18, No. 3, 11.06.2018, p. 277-288.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness thresholds

T2 - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

AU - Santos,André Soares

AU - Guerra Júnior,Augusto Afonso

AU - Godman,Brian

AU - Morton,Alec

AU - Brandão,Cristina Mariano Ruas

PY - 2018/6/11

Y1 - 2018/6/11

N2 - INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) are used to judge if an intervention represents sufficient value for money to merit adoption in healthcare systems. The study was motivated by the Brazilian context of HTA, where meetings are being conducted to decide on the definition of a threshold. AREAS COVERED: An electronic search was conducted on Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via BVS) and ScienceDirect followed by a complementary search of references of included studies, Google Scholar and conference abstracts. Cost-effectiveness thresholds are usually calculated through three different approaches: the willingness-to-pay, representative of welfare economics; the precedent method, based on the value of an already funded technology; and the opportunity cost method, which links the threshold to the volume of health displaced. An explicit threshold has never been formally adopted in most places. Some countries have defined thresholds, with some flexibility to consider other factors. An implicit threshold could be determined by research of funded cases. EXPERT COMMENTARY: CETs have had an important role as a “bridging concept” between the world of academic research and the “real world” of healthcare prioritization. The definition of a cost-effectiveness threshold is paramount for the construction of a transparent and efficient Health Technology Assessment system.

AB - INTRODUCTION: Cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) are used to judge if an intervention represents sufficient value for money to merit adoption in healthcare systems. The study was motivated by the Brazilian context of HTA, where meetings are being conducted to decide on the definition of a threshold. AREAS COVERED: An electronic search was conducted on Medline (via PubMed), Lilacs (via BVS) and ScienceDirect followed by a complementary search of references of included studies, Google Scholar and conference abstracts. Cost-effectiveness thresholds are usually calculated through three different approaches: the willingness-to-pay, representative of welfare economics; the precedent method, based on the value of an already funded technology; and the opportunity cost method, which links the threshold to the volume of health displaced. An explicit threshold has never been formally adopted in most places. Some countries have defined thresholds, with some flexibility to consider other factors. An implicit threshold could be determined by research of funded cases. EXPERT COMMENTARY: CETs have had an important role as a “bridging concept” between the world of academic research and the “real world” of healthcare prioritization. The definition of a cost-effectiveness threshold is paramount for the construction of a transparent and efficient Health Technology Assessment system.

KW - cost-benefit analysis

KW - cost-effectiveness analysis

KW - medical economics

KW - pharmaceutical economics

KW - expert testimony

KW - technology assessment

KW - biomedical

UR - http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/ierp20

U2 - 10.1080/14737167.2018.1443810

DO - 10.1080/14737167.2018.1443810

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 277

EP - 288

JO - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

JF - Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research

SN - 1473-7167

IS - 3

ER -