IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chy/respap/54cherp.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Appropriate Perspectives for Health Care Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Karl Claxton

    (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK and Department of Economics and Related Studies, University of York, UK)

  • Simon Walker

    (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK)

  • Steven Palmer

    (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK)

  • Mark Sculpher

    (Centre for Health Economics, University of York, UK)

Abstract

NICE uses cost-effectiveness analysis to compare the health benefits expected to be gained by using a technology with the health that is likely to be forgone due to additional costs falling on the health care budget and displacing other activities that improve health. This approach to informing decisions will be appropriate if the social objective is to improve health, the measure of health is adequate and the budget for health care can reasonably be regarded as fixed. If NICE were to recommend a broader =societal perspective‘, wider effects impacting on other areas of the public sector and the wider economy would be formally incorporated into analyses and decisions. The problem for policy is that, in the face of budgets legitimately set by government, it is not clear how or whether a societal perspective can be implemented, particularly if transfers between sectors are not possible. It poses the question of how the trade-offs between health, consumption and other social arguments, as well as the valuation of market and non market activities, ought to be undertaken.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:chy:respap:54cherp
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.york.ac.uk/media/che/documents/papers/researchpapers/rp54_appropriate_perspectives_for_health_care_decisions.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kobelt, Gisela & Lindgren, Peter & Parkin, David & Francis, David A. & Johnson, Michael & Bates, David & Jönsson, Bengt, 2000. "Costs and Quality of Life in Multiple Sclerosis. A Cross-Sectional Observational Study in the UK," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance 398, Stockholm School of Economics.
    2. Appleby, John & Devlin, Nancy & Parkin, David & Buxton, Martin & Chalkidou, Kalipso, 2009. "Searching for cost effectiveness thresholds in the NHS," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(3), pages 239-245, August.
    3. Drummond, Michael F. & Sculpher, Mark J. & Torrance, George W. & O'Brien, Bernie J. & Stoddart, Greg L., 2005. "Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, edition 3, number 9780198529453.
    4. Werner B. F. Brouwer & Marc A. Koopmanschap & Frans F. H. Rutten, 1997. "Productivity Costs Measurement Through Quality of Life? A Response to the Recommendation of the Washington Panel," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 253-259.
    5. Martin, Stephen & Rice, Nigel & Smith, Peter C., 2008. "Does health care spending improve health outcomes? Evidence from English programme budgeting data," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 826-842, July.
    6. Brouwer, Werner B.F. & Culyer, Anthony J. & van Exel, N. Job A. & Rutten, Frans F.H., 2008. "Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 325-338, March.
    7. Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Tony Culyer, 2007. "Mark versus Luke? Appropriate Methods for the Evaluation of Public Health Interventions," Working Papers 031cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    8. Garber, Alan M. & Phelps, Charles E., 1997. "Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-31, February.
    9. Werner B.F. Brouwer & Marc A. Koopmanschap & Frans F.H. Rutten, 1997. "Productivity costs in cost-effectiveness analysis: numerator or denominator: a further discussion," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(5), pages 511-514.
    10. David E. Bloom & David Canning & Jaypee Sevilla, 2001. "The Effect of Health on Economic Growth: Theory and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 8587, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Mike Paulden & Karl Claxton, 2009. "Budget allocation and the revealed social rate of time preference for health," Working Papers 053cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    12. 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.
    13. Karl Claxton & Mike Paulden & Hugh Gravelle & Werner Brouwer & Anthony J. Culyer, 2011. "Discounting and decision making in the economic evaluation of health‐care technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 2-15, January.
    14. Stinnett, Aaron A. & Paltiel, A. David, 1996. "Mathematical programming for the efficient allocation of health care resources," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 641-653, October.
    15. Johannesson, Magnus & O'Conor, Richard M., 1997. "Cost-utility analysis from a societal perspective," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 241-253, March.
    16. 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.
    17. Meltzer, David, 1997. "Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 33-64, February.
    18. Johannesson, Magnus & Weinstein, Milton C., 1993. "On the decision rules of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 459-467, December.
    19. Xavier Sala-I-Martin & Gernot Doppelhofer & Ronald I. Miller, 2004. "Determinants of Long-Term Growth: A Bayesian Averaging of Classical Estimates (BACE) Approach," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 94(4), pages 813-835, September.
    20. Johannesson, Magnus, 1995. "The relationship between cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 483-489, August.
    21. Aaron A. Stinnett & John Mullahy, 1998. "Net Health Benefits: A New Framework for the Analysis of Uncertainty in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," NBER Technical Working Papers 0227, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Hurley, Jeremiah, 2000. "An overview of the normative economics of the health sector," Handbook of Health Economics,in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 55-118 Elsevier.
    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. Krol, Marieke & Brouwer, Werner, 2015. "Unpaid work in health economic evaluations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 127-137.
    2. Bonny Parkinson & Stephen Goodall & Richard Norman, 2013. "Measuring the Loss of Consumer Choice in Mandatory Health Programmes Using Discrete Choice Experiments," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 139-150, April.
    3. Marieke Krol & Jocé Papenburg & Siok Swan Tan & Werner Brouwer & Leona Hakkaart, 2016. "A noticeable difference? Productivity costs related to paid and unpaid work in economic evaluations on expensive drugs," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(4), pages 391-402, May.
    4. Wildman, John & McMeekin, Peter & Grieve, Eleanor & Briggs, Andrew, 2016. "Economic evaluation of integrated new technologies for health and social care: Suggestions for policy makers, users and evaluators," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 141-148.
    5. Helen Weatherly & Rita Faria & Bernard Van den Berg & Mark Sculpher & Peter O’Neill & Kay Nolan & Julie Glanville & Jaana Isojarvi & Erin Baragula & Mary Edwards, 2017. "Scoping review on social care economic evaluation methods," Working Papers 150cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    6. Attema, Arthur & Krol, Marieke & van Exel, Job & Brouwer, Werner, 2014. "New findings from the TTO for income approach to elicit willingness to pay for a QALY," MPRA Paper 61197, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Stuart Carroll, 2011. "Value-based pricing for pharmaceuticals: Its role, specification and prospects in a newly devolved NHS," Working Papers 060cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    8. Marieke Krol & Elly Stolk & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "Predicting productivity based on EQ-5D: an explorative study," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(5), pages 465-475, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Hareth Al-Janabi & Nikki McCaffrey & Julie Ratcliffe, 2013. "Carer Preferences in Economic Evaluation and Healthcare Decision Making," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, vol. 6(4), pages 235-239, December.
    11. Wei Zhang & Aslam Anis, 2014. "Health-Related Productivity Loss: NICE to Recognize Soon, Good to Discuss Now," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 425-427, May.
    12. David Epstein & Leticia García-Mochón & Stephen Kaptoge & Simon G. Thompson, 2016. "Modeling the costs and long-term health benefits of screening the general population for risks of cardiovascular disease: a review of methods used in the literature," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(8), pages 1041-1053, November.
    13. Grupo de Economía de la Salud & Jairo Humberto Restrepo, 2012. "Economía de las enfermedades crónicas no transmisibles: Implicaciones para Colombia," OBSERVATORIO SEGURIDAD SOCIAL 015579, GRUPO DE ECONOMÍA DE LA SALUD.
    14. Ana Bobinac & Job Exel & Frans Rutten & Werner Brouwer, 2014. "The Value of a QALY: Individual Willingness to Pay for Health Gains Under Risk," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 75-86, January.
    15. Beth Woods & Paul Revill & Mark Sculpher & Karl Claxton, 2015. "Country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds: initial estimates and the need for further research," Working Papers 109cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Perspective. Cost-effectiveness analysis. Economic evaluation.;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:chy:respap:54cherp. 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: (Gill Forder). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/chyoruk.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.