IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0189173.html

Cost-effectiveness of national health insurance programs in high-income countries: A systematic review

Author

Listed:
  • Son Nghiem
  • Nicholas Graves
  • Adrian Barnett
  • Catherine Haden

Abstract

Objectives: National health insurance is now common in most developed countries. This study reviews the evidence and synthesizes the cost-effectiveness information for national health insurance or disability insurance programs across high-income countries. Data sources: A literature search using health, economics and systematic review electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Medline, Econlit, RepEc, Cochrane library and Campbell library), was conducted from April to October 2015. Study selection: Two reviewers independently selected relevant studies by applying screening criteria to the title and keywords fields, followed by a detailed examination of abstracts. Data extraction: Studies were selected for data extraction using a quality assessment form consisting of five questions. Only studies with positive answers to all five screening questions were selected for data extraction. Data were entered into a data extraction form by one reviewer and verified by another. Evidence synthesis: Data on costs and quality of life in control and treatment groups were used to draw distributions for synthesis. We chose the log-normal distribution for both cost and quality-of-life data to reflect non-negative value and high skew. The results were synthesized using a Monte Carlo simulation, with 10,000 repetitions, to estimate the overall cost-effectiveness of national health insurance programs. Results: Four studies from the United States that examined the cost-effectiveness of national health insurance were included in the review. One study examined the effects of medical expenditure, and the remaining studies examined the cost-effectiveness of health insurance reforms. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) ranged from US$23,000 to US$64,000 per QALY. The combined results showed that national health insurance is associated with an average incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of US$51,300 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Based on the standard threshold for cost-effectiveness, national insurance programs are cost-effective interventions. Conclusions: Although national health insurance programs have been introduced in most developed countries, only a few studies have examined their cost-effectiveness. All the selected studies revealed strong evidence to support health insurance programs or health reforms in the United States. The average ICER in this study is below the standard threshold for cost-effectiveness used in the US. The small number of relevant studies is the main limitation of this study.

Suggested Citation

  • Son Nghiem & Nicholas Graves & Adrian Barnett & Catherine Haden, 2017. "Cost-effectiveness of national health insurance programs in high-income countries: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-11, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0189173
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189173
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189173
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0189173&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0189173?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. Bebu, Ionut & Luta, George & Mathew, Thomas & Kennedy, Paul A. & Agan, Brian K., 2016. "Parametric cost-effectiveness inference with skewed data," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 210-220.
    2. Jung, Juergen & Tran, Chung, 2022. "Social health insurance: A quantitative exploration," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    3. Muennig, P.A. & Quan, R. & Chiuzan, C. & Glied, S., 2015. "Considering whether Medicaid is worth the cost: Revisiting the Oregon Health Study," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(5), pages 866-871.
    4. Muennig, P. & Caleyachetty, R. & Rosen, Z. & Korotzer, A., 2015. "More money, fewer lives: The cost effectiveness of welfare reform in the United States," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(2), pages 324-328.
    5. Richard A. Hirth & Michael E. Chernew & Edward Miller & A. Mark Fendrick & William G. Weissert, 2000. "Willingness to Pay for a Quality-adjusted Life Year," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 20(3), pages 332-342, July.
    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. Moshe Yanovskiy & Yehoshua Socol, 2022. "Are Lockdowns Effective in Managing Pandemics?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-12, July.

    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. John Vernon & Robert Goldberg & Joseph Golec, 2009. "Economic Evaluation and Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 27(10), pages 797-806, October.
    2. Scott Johnson & Matthew Davis & Anna Kaltenboeck & Howard Birnbaum & ElizaBeth Grubb & Marcy Tarrants & Andrew Siderowf, 2011. "Early retirement and income loss in patients with early and advanced Parkinson’s disease," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(6), pages 367-376, November.
    3. Richard H. Chapman & Marc Berger & Milton C. Weinstein & Jane C. Weeks & Sue Goldie & Peter J. Neumann, 2004. "When does quality‐adjusting life‐years matter in cost‐effectiveness analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 429-436, May.
    4. Hui Zhang & Christian Wernz & Danny R. Hughes, 2018. "Modeling and designing health care payment innovations for medical imaging," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 37-51, March.
    5. Donald S Shepard & Yara A Halasa & Dina M Fonseca & Ary Farajollahi & Sean P Healy & Randy Gaugler & Kristen Bartlett-Healy & Daniel A Strickman & Gary G Clark, 2014. "Economic Evaluation of an Area-Wide Integrated Pest Management Program to Control the Asian Tiger Mosquito in New Jersey," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-11, October.
    6. Dixon, Huw David & Tian, Maoshan, 2022. "The Confidence Interval of Cross-Sectional Distribution of Durations," Cardiff Economics Working Papers E2022/15, Cardiff University, Cardiff Business School, Economics Section.
    7. Nicolas Boespflug & Jérôme Wittwer & Antoine Bénard, 2024. "Factors associated with the author-reported cost-effectiveness threshold in high-income countries: systematic review and multivariable modelling," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 25(4), pages 631-639, June.
    8. Franz Hessel & Christoph Wegner & Johannes Müller & Christina Glaveris & Jürgen Wasem, 2004. "Economic evaluation and survival analysis of immunoglobulin adsorption in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 5(1), pages 58-63, February.
    9. Ryen, Linda & Svensson, Mikael, 2014. "The Willingness to Pay for a QALY: a Review of the Empirical Literature," Karlstad University Working Papers in Economics 12, Karlstad University, Department of Economics.
    10. Smith, Richard D. & Richardson, Jeff, 2005. "Can we estimate the `social' value of a QALY?: Four core issues to resolve," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(1), pages 77-84, September.
    11. Arthur E. Attema & Marieke Krol & Job van Exel & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2018. "New findings from the time trade-off for income approach to elicit willingness to pay for a quality adjusted life year," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(2), pages 277-291, March.
    12. Lars Hein & Pete Roberts & Lucia Gonzalez, 2016. "Valuing a Statistical Life Year in Relation to Clean Air," Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management (JEAPM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(04), pages 1-24, December.
    13. Dorothea Kesztyüs & Romy Lauer & Anja Schreiber & Tibor Kesztyüs & Reinhold Kilian & Jürgen Steinacker, 2014. "Parents’ willingness to pay for the prevention of childhood overweight and obesity," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 1-8, December.
    14. Jinjing Wu & Shelby Deaton & Boshen Jiao & Zohn Rosen & Peter A Muennig, 2018. "The cost-effectiveness analysis of the New Rural Cooperative Medical Scheme in China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-13, December.
    15. Brian Mills & Dan Unrau & Laurel Pentelow & Kelsey Spring, 2010. "Assessment of lightning-related damage and disruption in Canada," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 52(2), pages 481-499, February.
    16. Mulligan, Karen & Baid, Drishti & Doctor, Jason N. & Phelps, Charles E. & Lakdawalla, Darius N., 2024. "Risk preferences over health: Empirical estimates and implications for medical decision-making," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    17. Sood Neeraj & Philipson Tomas J. & Huckfeldt Peter, 2013. "Quantifying the Value of Personalized Medicines: Evidence from COX-2 Inhibitors," Forum for Health Economics & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 16(1), pages 101-122, April.
    18. Clément Carbonnier, 2023. "Welfare Economics and Neoliberalism: Interpreting the ideal type of perfect competition general equilibrium," Sciences Po Economics Publications (main) hal-04062786, HAL.
    19. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2017. "The impact of pharmaceutical innovation on cancer mortality in Mexico, 2003–2013," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 26(1), pages 1-22, December.
    20. Ted R Miller & Geetha M Waehrer & Debora L Oh & Sukhdip Purewal Boparai & Sheila Ohlsson Walker & Sara Silverio Marques & Nadine Burke Harris, 2020. "Adult health burden and costs in California during 2013 associated with prior adverse childhood experiences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15, 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:plo:pone00:0189173. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.