Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits: reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal

Alec Morton, Amanda I. Adler, Andy Briggs, David Bell, Werner Brouwer, Karl Claxton, Alastair Fischer, Neil Craig, Peter McGregor, Pieter van Baal

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of “unrelated future costs” (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies and we urge future research to understand this better.
LanguageEnglish
Pages933–938
Number of pages6
JournalHealth Economics
Volume25
Issue number8
Early online date3 Jul 2016
Publication statusPublished - 31 Aug 2016

Fingerprint

National Institutes of Health (U.S.)
Technology
Delivery of Health Care
Costs and Cost Analysis
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Renal Insufficiency
Dementia
Myocardial Infarction
Excellence
Health
Guidance
Costs

Keywords

  • NICE
  • medical technologies
  • unrelated future costs
  • economic appraisal
  • healthcare

Cite this

Morton, A., Adler, A. I., Briggs, A., Bell, D., Brouwer, W., Claxton, K., ... van Baal, P. (2016). Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits: reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal. Health Economics, 25(8), 933–938.
Morton, Alec ; Adler, Amanda I. ; Briggs, Andy ; Bell, David ; Brouwer, Werner ; Claxton, Karl ; Fischer, Alastair ; Craig, Neil ; McGregor, Peter ; van Baal, Pieter. / Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits : reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal. In: Health Economics. 2016 ; Vol. 25, No. 8. pp. 933–938.
@article{8aff8eae38824dbf85d33c0a821840cb,
title = "Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits: reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal",
abstract = "In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of “unrelated future costs” (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies and we urge future research to understand this better.",
keywords = "NICE, medical technologies, unrelated future costs, economic appraisal, healthcare",
author = "Alec Morton and Adler, {Amanda I.} and Andy Briggs and David Bell and Werner Brouwer and Karl Claxton and Alastair Fischer and Neil Craig and Peter McGregor and {van Baal}, Pieter",
note = "This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Morton, A., Adler, A. I., Bell, D., Briggs, A., Brouwer, W., Claxton, K., Craig, N., Fischer, A., McGregor, P., and van Baal, P. (2016) Unrelated Future Costs and Unrelated Future Benefits: Reflections on NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. Health Econ., 25: 933–938. doi: 10.1002/hec.3366., which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.3366. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.",
year = "2016",
month = "8",
day = "31",
language = "English",
volume = "25",
pages = "933–938",
journal = "Health Economics",
issn = "1057-9230",
number = "8",

}

Morton, A, Adler, AI, Briggs, A, Bell, D, Brouwer, W, Claxton, K, Fischer, A, Craig, N, McGregor, P & van Baal, P 2016, 'Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits: reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal' Health Economics, vol. 25, no. 8, pp. 933–938.

Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits : reflections on NICE guidance to the methods of technology appraisal. / Morton, Alec; Adler, Amanda I.; Briggs, Andy ; Bell, David; Brouwer, Werner; Claxton, Karl; Fischer, Alastair; Craig, Neil; McGregor, Peter; van Baal, Pieter.

In: Health Economics, Vol. 25, No. 8, 31.08.2016, p. 933–938.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Unrelated future costs and unrelated future benefits

T2 - Health Economics

AU - Morton, Alec

AU - Adler, Amanda I.

AU - Briggs, Andy

AU - Bell, David

AU - Brouwer, Werner

AU - Claxton, Karl

AU - Fischer, Alastair

AU - Craig, Neil

AU - McGregor, Peter

AU - van Baal, Pieter

N1 - This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Morton, A., Adler, A. I., Bell, D., Briggs, A., Brouwer, W., Claxton, K., Craig, N., Fischer, A., McGregor, P., and van Baal, P. (2016) Unrelated Future Costs and Unrelated Future Benefits: Reflections on NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal. Health Econ., 25: 933–938. doi: 10.1002/hec.3366., which has been published in final form at http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.3366. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.

PY - 2016/8/31

Y1 - 2016/8/31

N2 - In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of “unrelated future costs” (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies and we urge future research to understand this better.

AB - In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of “unrelated future costs” (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies and we urge future research to understand this better.

KW - NICE

KW - medical technologies

KW - unrelated future costs

KW - economic appraisal

KW - healthcare

UR - http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/10.1002/(ISSN)1099-1050

M3 - Article

VL - 25

SP - 933

EP - 938

JO - Health Economics

JF - Health Economics

SN - 1057-9230

IS - 8

ER -