IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/hlthec/v19y2010i10p1117-1127.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation of health‐care interventions

Author

Listed:
  • J. Jaime Caro
  • Erik Nord
  • Uwe Siebert
  • Alistair McGuire
  • Maurice McGregor
  • David Henry
  • Gérard de Pouvourville
  • Vincenzo Atella
  • Peter Kolominsky‐Rabas

Abstract

Background: IQWiG commissioned an international panel of experts to develop methods for the assessment of the relation of benefits to costs in the German statutory health‐care system. Proposed methods: The panel recommended that IQWiG inform German decision makers of the net costs and value of additional benefits of an intervention in the context of relevant other interventions in that indication. To facilitate guidance regarding maximum reimbursement, this information is presented in an efficiency plot with costs on the horizontal axis and value of benefits on the vertical. The efficiency frontier links the interventions that are not dominated and provides guidance. A technology that places on the frontier or to the left is reasonably efficient, while one falling to the right requires further justification for reimbursement at that price. This information does not automatically give the maximum reimbursement, as other considerations may be relevant. Given that the estimates are for a specific indication, they do not address priority setting across the health‐care system. Conclusion: This approach informs decision makers about efficiency of interventions, conforms to the mandate and is consistent with basic economic principles. Empirical testing of its feasibility and usefulness is required. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Suggested Citation

  • J. Jaime Caro & Erik Nord & Uwe Siebert & Alistair McGuire & Maurice McGregor & David Henry & Gérard de Pouvourville & Vincenzo Atella & Peter Kolominsky‐Rabas, 2010. "The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation of health‐care interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1117-1127, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:19:y:2010:i:10:p:1117-1127
    DOI: 10.1002/hec.1629
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.1629
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/hec.1629?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A. Bessent & W. Bessent & J. Elam & T. Clark, 1988. "Efficiency Frontier Determination by Constrained Facet Analysis," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(5), pages 785-796, October.
    2. Dan Horsky & Paul Nelson, 1996. "Evaluation of Salesforce Size and Productivity Through Efficient Frontier Benchmarking," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(4), pages 301-320.
    3. Zuckerman, Stephen & Hadley, Jack & Iezzoni, Lisa, 1994. "Measuring hospital efficiency with frontier cost functions," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 255-280, October.
    4. Birch, Stephen & Gafni, Amiram, 1992. "Cost effectiveness/utility analyses : Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be?," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 279-296, October.
    5. McCabe, C & Claxton, K & Culyer, AJ, 2008. "The NICE Cost-Effectiveness Threshold: What it is and What that Means," MPRA Paper 26466, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Johnes, Jill & Johnes, Geraint, 1995. "Research funding and performance in U.K. University Departments of Economics: A frontier analysis," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 14(3), pages 301-314, September.
    7. William C. Black, 1990. "The CE Plane," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 10(3), pages 212-214, August.
    8. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Maarten Ijzerman & Lotte Steuten, 2011. "Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 331-347, September.
    2. Marije E. Hagendijk & Simon Schans & Cornelis Boersma & Maarten J. Postma & Simon Pol, 2021. "Economic evaluation of orphan drug Lutetium-Octreotate vs. Octreotide long-acting release for patients with an advanced midgut neuroendocrine tumour in the Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(6), pages 991-999, August.
    3. Erik Nord, 2018. "Beyond QALYs: Multi-criteria based estimation of maximum willingness to pay for health technologies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(2), pages 267-275, March.
    4. Werner B. F. Brouwer & Frans F. H. Rutten, 2010. "The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation: will it help German policy making?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1128-1131, October.
    5. repec:bla:glopol:v:8:y:2017:i::p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    7. Mark Sculpher & Karl Claxton, 2010. "Sins of omission and obfuscation: IQWIG's guidelines on economic evaluation methods," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1132-1136, October.
    8. Panos Kanavos & Olivier Wouters & John S. F. Wright & Anthony J. G. Barron & Sara M. B. Shah & Corinna Klingler, 2017. "Convergence, Divergence and Hybridity: A Regulatory Governance Perspective on Health Technology Assessment in England and Germany," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8(s2), pages 69-75, March.
    9. Baines, Darrin & Disegna, Marta & Hartwell, Christopher A., 2021. "Portfolio frontier analysis: Applying mean-variance analysis to health technology assessment for health systems under pressure," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    10. Martin Emmert & Frank Eijkenaar & Heike Kemter & Adelheid Esslinger & Oliver Schöffski, 2012. "Economic evaluation of pay-for-performance in health care: a systematic review," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(6), pages 755-767, December.
    11. Erik Nord, 2011. "Discounting future health benefits: the poverty of consistency arguments," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 16-26, January.
    12. Klingler, Corinna & Shah, Sara M.B. & Barron, Anthony J.G. & Wright, John S.F., 2013. "Regulatory space and the contextual mediation of common functional pressures: Analyzing the factors that led to the German Efficiency Frontier approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 270-280.
    13. Mark Sculpher, 2013. "Methods Development for Health Technology Assessment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 33(3), pages 313-315, April.
    14. Björn Stollenwerk & Stefan K. Lhachimi & Andrew Briggs & Elisabeth Fenwick & Jaime J. Caro & Uwe Siebert & Marion Danner & Andreas Gerber‐Grote, 2015. "Communicating the Parameter Uncertainty in the IQWiG Efficiency Frontier to Decision‐Makers," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 481-490, April.
    15. Maarten Ijzerman & Janine Til & John Bridges, 2012. "A Comparison of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis Methods in Assessing Treatment Alternatives for Stroke Rehabilitation," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(1), pages 45-56, March.
    16. Charalabos‐Markos Dintsios & Andreas Gerber, 2010. "Some essential clarifications: IQWiG comments on two critiques of the efficiency frontier approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1139-1141, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klingler, Corinna & Shah, Sara M.B. & Barron, Anthony J.G. & Wright, John S.F., 2013. "Regulatory space and the contextual mediation of common functional pressures: Analyzing the factors that led to the German Efficiency Frontier approach," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(3), pages 270-280.
    2. Simon Eckermann, 2015. "Kinky Thresholds Revisited: Opportunity Costs Differ in the NE and SW Quadrants," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 7-13, February.
    3. Karl Claxton & Simon Walker & Steven Palmer & Mark Sculpher, 2010. "Appropriate Perspectives for Health Care Decisions," Working Papers 054cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    4. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Interventions for Screening of Dementia," Working Papers 2018:20, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    5. Büschken, Joachim, 2009. "When does data envelopment analysis outperform a naïve efficiency measurement model?," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 647-657, January.
    6. Andrea Gabrio & Catrin Plumpton & Sube Banerjee & Baptiste Leurent, 2022. "Linear mixed models to handle missing at random data in trial‐based economic evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(6), pages 1276-1287, June.
    7. Ryuichi Ohta & Yoshinori Ryu & Daisuke Kataoka & Chiaki Sano, 2021. "Effectiveness and Challenges in Local Self-Governance: Multifunctional Autonomy in Japan," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-14, January.
    8. Erik Nord, 2015. "Cost-Value Analysis of Health Interventions: Introduction and Update on Methods and Preference Data," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 89-95, February.
    9. Michaël Schwarzinger & Jean‐Louis Lanoë & Erik Nord & Isabelle Durand‐Zaleski, 2004. "Lack of multiplicative transitivity in person trade‐off responses," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(2), pages 171-181, February.
    10. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Alexander Dobruschkin & Gunhild von Amsberg & Judith Dams, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Sanjib Saha & Ulf-G Gerdtham & Pia Johansson, 2010. "Economic Evaluation of Lifestyle Interventions for Preventing Diabetes and Cardiovascular Diseases," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 7(8), pages 1-46, August.
    12. Jack Dowie, 2004. "Why cost‐effectiveness should trump (clinical) effectiveness: the ethical economics of the South West quadrant," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 453-459, May.
    13. Saha, Sanjib & Gerdtham, Ulf-G. & Toresson, Håkan & Minthon, Lennart & Jarl, Johan, 2018. "Economic Evaluation of Nonpharmacological Interventions for Dementia Patients and their Caregivers - A Systematic Literature Review," Working Papers 2018:10, Lund University, Department of Economics.
    14. Anna Nicolet & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Karin M Vermeulen & Paul F M Krabbe, 2020. "Value judgment of new medical treatments: Societal and patient perspectives to inform priority setting in The Netherlands," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-18, July.
    15. Rhiannon Tudor Edwards & Catherine Louise Lawrence, 2021. "‘What You See is All There is’: The Importance of Heuristics in Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) and Social Return on Investment (SROI) in the Evaluation of Public Health Interventions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 19(5), pages 653-664, September.
    16. Valadkhani, Abbas & Ville, Simon, 2008. "Identifying the Most Research Intensive Faculties of Business in Australia: A Multidimensional Approach," Economics Working Papers wp08-03, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    17. Tyagi, Preeti & Yadav, Shiv Prasad & Singh, S.P., 2009. "Relative performance of academic departments using DEA with sensitivity analysis," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 168-177, May.
    18. Damschroder, Laura J. & Zikmund-Fisher, Brian J. & Ubel, Peter A., 2005. "The impact of considering adaptation in health state valuation," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 267-277, July.
    19. Elisa Sicuri & Silke Fernandes & Eusebio Macete & Raquel González & Ghyslain Mombo-Ngoma & Achille Massougbodgi & Salim Abdulla & August Kuwawenaruwa & Abraham Katana & Meghna Desai & Michel Cot & Mic, 2015. "Economic Evaluation of an Alternative Drug to Sulfadoxine-Pyrimethamine as Intermittent Preventive Treatment of Malaria in Pregnancy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-23, April.
    20. A. Gafni & S. D. Walter & S. Birch & P. Sendi, 2008. "An opportunity cost approach to sample size calculation in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(1), pages 99-107, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:19:y:2010:i:10:p:1117-1127. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/5749 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.