IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Endogenous Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Health Care Technology Adoption

Author Info

  • Anupam Jena
  • Tomas Philipson

Abstract

Increased health care spending has been argued to be largely due to technological change. Cost-effectiveness analysis is the main tool used by private and public third-party payers to prioritize adoption of the new technologies responsible for this growth. However, such analysis by payers invariably reflects prices set by producers rather than resources used to produce treatments. This implies that the "costs" in cost-effectiveness assessments depend on endogenous markups which are, in turn, influenced by demand factors of patients, doctors, and payers. Reimbursement policy based on endogenous cost-effectiveness levels may therefore bear little relationship to efficient use of scarce medical resources. Using data on technology appraisals in the United Kingdom, we test for conditions under which adoption based on endogenous cost-effectiveness may lead to adoption of more inefficient treatments in terms of resource use.

Download Info

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.

File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w15032.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 15032.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Jun 2009
Date of revision:
Publication status: published as Journal of Health Economics Volume 32, Issue 1, January 2013, Pages 172–180 Cover image Endogenous cost-effectiveness analysis and health care technology adoption ☆ Anupam B. Jenaa, Tomas J. Philipsonb,
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15032
Note: AG HC HE
Contact details of provider: Postal:
National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.

Phone: 617-868-3900
Web page: http://www.nber.org
Email:


More information through EDIRC

Keywords:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

  • I0 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - General
  • I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health
  • I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets
  • I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

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.:

as in new window
  1. Joseph P. Newhouse, 1992. "Medical Care Costs: How Much Welfare Loss?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 3-21, Summer.
  2. Garber, Alan M., 2000. "Advances in cost-effectiveness analysis of health interventions," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 4, pages 181-221 Elsevier.
  3. Meltzer, David, 1997. "Accounting for future costs in medical cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 33-64, February.
  4. David Meltzer, 1997. "Accounting for Future Costs in Medical Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," NBER Working Papers 5946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Jena, Anupam B. & Philipson, Tomas J., 2008. "Cost-effectiveness analysis and innovation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 1224-1236, September.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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

as in new window


Cited by:

  1. Mikael Svensson & Fredrik Nilsson & Karl Arnberg, 2015. "Reimbursement Decisions for Pharmaceuticals in Sweden: The Impact of Disease Severity and Cost Effectiveness," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(11), pages 1229-1236, November.
  2. Elamin H. Elbasha & Jagpreet Chhatwal, 2016. "Myths and Misconceptions of Within-Cycle Correction: A Guide for Modelers and Decision Makers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 13-22, January.
  3. Dana Goldman & Darius Lakdawalla & Tomas J. Philipson & Wesley Yin, 2010. "Valuing health technologies at nice: recommendations for improved incorporation of treatment value in HTA," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1109-1116.
  4. Anirban Basu, 2011. "Economics of Individualization in Comparative Effectiveness Research and a Basis for a Patient-Centered Health Care," NBER Working Papers 16900, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Elamin Elbasha & Jagpreet Chhatwal, 2016. "Myths and Misconceptions of Within-Cycle Correction: A Guide for Modelers and Decision Makers," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 13-22, January.
  6. Anirban Basu & Tomas J. Philipson, 2010. "The Impact of Comparative Effectiveness Research on Health and Health Care Spending," NBER Working Papers 15633, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Boone, Jan, 2013. "Does the market choose optimal health insurance coverage?," CEPR Discussion Papers 9420, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  8. Amitabh Chandra & Anupam B. Jena & Jonathan S. Skinner, 2011. "The Pragmatist's Guide to Comparative Effectiveness Research," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 25(2), pages 27-46, Spring.
  9. Maximilian Hatz & Katharina Schremser & Wolf Rogowski, 2014. "Is Individualized Medicine More Cost-Effective? A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(5), pages 443-455, May.
  10. Fischer, Katharina E. & Rogowski, Wolf H. & Leidl, Reiner & Stollenwerk, Björn, 2013. "Transparency vs. closed-door policy: Do process characteristics have an impact on the outcomes of coverage decisions? A statistical analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 187-196.
  11. Ben van Hout & Jolian McHardy & Aki Tsuchiya, 2015. "Patent Purchase as a Policy for Pharmaceuticals," Working Papers 2015007, The University of Sheffield, Department of Economics.
  12. Rodrigo Camejo & Clare McGrath & Marisa Miraldo & Frans Rutten, 2014. "Distribution of health-related social surplus in pharmaceuticals: an estimation of consumer and producer surplus in the management of high blood lipids and COPD," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 15(4), pages 439-445, May.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Access and download statistics

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:15032. 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: ()

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.