Nach welchen ökonomischen Methoden sollten Gesundheitsleistungen in Deutschland evaluiert werden?
The paper presents the methodological challenges of the introduction of cost-benefit assessment by the German legislative (Competition Enhancement Act). Based on the standards for health economic evaluation accepted by the international scientific health economic community, this paper provides a minimum catalogue of methods and criteria to meet the legal German requirements. The methodological framework presented in this paper discusses the perspective to be used to evaluate cost and benefits, lists the appropriate study form, names the usage of primary or secondary data, the description of the cost and benefit calculation, shows the specific need on modelling and how to handle uncertainties and calls for a disclosure of potential conflict of interests. Further more, the paper contains detailed recommendations for the assessment-process in Germany. According to the new Competition Enhancement Act, the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (Institut fuer Qualitaet und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen, IQWiG) has to evaluate the cost-benefit ratio of pharmaceuticals in Germany. The process should be organized within two sequently parts: At first the development of a reporting plan that defines the comparative interventions to be included, the target criteria, assessment methods and the schedule to be observed, and secondly the implementation of the cost-benefit assessment.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 227 (2007)
Issue (Month): 5+6 (December)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +49 (0)641 99 22 001
Fax: +49 (0)641 99 22 009
Web page: http://wiwi.uni-giessen.de/home/oekonometrie/Jahrbuecher/
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- J. Jaime Caro, 2005. "Pharmacoeconomic Analyses Using Discrete Event Simulation," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 23(4), pages 323-332.
- Jonathan Karnon, 2003. "Alternative decision modelling techniques for the evaluation of health care technologies: Markov processes versus discrete event simulation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(10), pages 837-848.
- Meltzer, David, 2001. "Addressing uncertainty in medical cost-effectiveness analysis: Implications of expected utility maximization for methods to perform sensitivity analysis and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to s," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 109-129, January.
- Murray, Christopher J. L. & Acharya, Arnab K., 1997. "Understanding DALYs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 703-730, December.
- Mark J. Sculpher & Karl Claxton & Mike Drummond & Chris McCabe, 2006. "Whither trial-based economic evaluation for health care decision making?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(7), pages 677-687.
- Zoe Philips & Laura Bojke & Mark Sculpher & Karl Claxton & Su Golder, 2006. "Good Practice Guidelines for Decision-Analytic Modelling in Health Technology Assessment: A Review and Consolidation of Quality Assessment," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 24(4), pages 355-371.
- Uwe Siebert, 2003. "When should decision-analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care?," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 143-150, September.
- Anand, Sudhir & Hanson, Kara, 1997. "Disability-adjusted life years: a critical review," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(6), pages 685-702, December.
- Paul Trueman & Michael Drummond & John Hutton, 2001. "Developing Guidance for Budget Impact Analysis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 19(6), pages 609-621.
- Andrew Briggs & Mark Sculpher & Jill Dawson & Ray Fitzpatrick & David Murray & Henrik Malchau, 2004. "The Use of Probabilistic Decision Models in Technology Assessment: The Case of Total Hip Replacement," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 3(2), pages 79-89.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:jns:jbstat:v:227:y:2007:i:5-6:p:787-805. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Winker)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.