The changing role of economic evaluation in valuing medical technologies

Economic evaluation is established within health-technology assessment but is challenged by those wanting to use economic evaluation to inform pricing and/or incorporate nontraditional sources of value and the views of diverse stakeholders. The changing role of economic evaluation in (formally or informally) assessing prices/values in four jurisdictions (UK, Australia, Germany and USA) is detailed and the authors propose a taxonomy of factors impacting the value of medical technology spanning clinical utility (effectiveness, safety/tolerability and quality of evidence), consumer demand (consumer preferences, process utility and unmet need), economic incentives (innovation, option value and market competition) and the societal perspective (social justice, social values and national interest). The authors suggest that multicriteria decision analysis methods grounded in hedonic-pricing theory can facilitate the valuing/pricing of medical technologies. The use of such an approach is hindered by a paucity of relevant educational opportunities, vested interests and aversion to placing prices/values on health.

[1]  J. Bridges Lean Systems Approaches to Health Technology Assessment , 2006, PharmacoEconomics.

[2]  A. Towse,et al.  National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE): Is Economic Appraisal Working? , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[3]  R. Baltussen,et al.  Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis , 2006, Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E.

[4]  Adrian Towse,et al.  Value based pricing, research and development, and patient access schemes. Will the United Kingdom get it right or wrong? , 2010, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[5]  Finn Børlum Kristensen,et al.  Involving stakeholders and developing a policy for stakeholder involvement in the European network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[6]  Stirling Bryan,et al.  Seeing the NICE side of cost-effectiveness analysis: a qualitative investigation of the use of CEA in NICE technology appraisals. , 2007, Health economics.

[7]  J. Hutton 'Health Economics' and the evolution of economic evaluation of health technologies. , 2012, Health economics.

[8]  A. Dhar,et al.  National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence , 2005 .

[9]  A. Gandjour Germany’s decision rule for setting ceiling prices of drugs , 2011, Applied health economics and health policy.

[10]  N. Shear Fulfilling an Unmet Need in Psoriasis , 2006, Drug safety.

[11]  Dana Goldman,et al.  Valuing health technologies at NICE: recommendations for improved incorporation of treatment value in HTA. , 2010, Health economics.

[12]  Stephen Joel Coons,et al.  US Valuation of the EQ-5D Health States: Development and Testing of the D1 Valuation Model , 2005, Medical care.

[13]  Clifford Goodman,et al.  Society for Medical Decision Making , 1988 .

[14]  Steven Wooding,et al.  Assessing the impact of health technology assessment in the Netherlands , 2008, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[15]  M Ryan,et al.  Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques. , 2001, Health technology assessment.

[16]  J. Singh International society for pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research , 2006 .

[17]  J Raftery Methodological limitations of cost-effectiveness analysis in health care: implications for decision making and service provision. , 1999, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[18]  A. Gafni,et al.  The 'NICE' Approach to Technology Assessment: An Economics Perspective , 2004, Health care management science.

[19]  John Harris,et al.  It’s not NICE to discriminate , 2005, Journal of Medical Ethics.

[20]  M. Drummond,et al.  IMPLEMENTING THE FINDINGS OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS , 2000, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[21]  Joshua T. Cohen,et al.  When is evidence sufficient? , 2005, Health affairs.

[22]  Jon Strand,et al.  The relationship between property values and railroad proximity: a study based on hedonic prices and real estate brokers' appraisals , 2001 .

[23]  M. Frommer,et al.  Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions , 2002, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[24]  Mita Giacomini,et al.  Bringing 'the public' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principles to practice. , 2007, Health policy.

[25]  S. Palmer,et al.  Incorporating option values into the economic evaluation of health care technologies. , 2000, Journal of health economics.

[26]  V. Suslow Are there better ways to spell relief? : a hedonic pricing analysis of ulcer drugs , 1992 .

[27]  Maarten J. IJzerman,et al.  Integrating patients' views into health technology assessment: Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) as a method to elicit patient preferences , 2011, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[28]  Maarten Joost IJzerman,et al.  A Comparison of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis Methods in Assessing Treatment Alternatives for Stroke Rehabilitation , 2012, The Patient - Patient-Centered Outcomes Research.

[29]  M. Gagnon,et al.  Introducing patients' and the public's perspectives to health technology assessment: A systematic review of international experiences , 2011, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[30]  Charles E. Cunningham,et al.  Providing Information to Parents of Children with Mental Health Problems: A Discrete Choice Conjoint Analysis of Professional Preferences , 2009, Journal of abnormal child psychology.

[31]  A Gafni,et al.  Cost effectiveness/utility analyses. Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be? , 1992, Journal of health economics.

[32]  R. Smith NICE: a panacea for the NHS? , 1999, BMJ.

[33]  Mandy Ryan,et al.  Using discrete choice experiments to value health care programmes: current practice and future research reflections. , 2003, Applied health economics and health policy.

[34]  Ken J Harvey The Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 2003–2004 , 2005, Australia and New Zealand health policy.

[35]  Y. Bombard,et al.  Eliciting ethical and social values in health technology assessment: A participatory approach. , 2011, Social Science & Medicine (1967).

[36]  F. Collins,et al.  Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute: The Intersection of Science and Health Care , 2010, Science Translational Medicine.

[37]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms , 2006 .

[38]  Richard J. Zeckhauser,et al.  The economics of catastrophes , 1996 .

[39]  Pekka Korhonen,et al.  Multiple criteria decision support - A review , 1992 .

[40]  T. Seager,et al.  Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Framework for Structuring Remedial Decisions at Contaminated Sites , 2004 .

[41]  Jing Jing Li,et al.  Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada. , 2009, JAMA.

[42]  Deborah Schrag,et al.  The price tag on progress--chemotherapy for colorectal cancer. , 2004, The New England journal of medicine.

[43]  Howard L Zwibel,et al.  Improving quality of life in multiple sclerosis: an unmet need. , 2011, The American journal of managed care.

[44]  J. Bridges,et al.  Identifying patient-relevant endpoints among individuals with schizophrenia: An application of patient-centered health technology assessment , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[45]  Bryn Williams-Jones,et al.  Mapping the integration of social and ethical issues in health technology assessment , 2007, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[46]  M. Weinstein,et al.  Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis. , 2005, The New England journal of medicine.

[47]  Emily Lancsar,et al.  Discrete choice experiments to measure consumer preferences for health and healthcare , 2002, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[48]  Murray D. Krahn,et al.  INTRODUCTION TO HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT , 2014 .

[49]  R. W. Hansen,et al.  The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs. , 2003, Journal of health economics.

[50]  L. Gulácsi,et al.  Health economics and health technology assessment in Central and Eastern Europe: a dose of reality , 2012, The European Journal of Health Economics.

[51]  T. L. Saaty A Scaling Method for Priorities in Hierarchical Structures , 1977 .

[52]  A. Coulter Perspectives on health technology assessment: response from the patient's perspective , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[53]  J. Eisenberg,et al.  Ten lessons for evidence-based technology assessment. , 1999, JAMA.

[54]  D. Weedon Health technology assessment in Australia , 1999, The Medical journal of Australia.

[55]  J. Zivin,et al.  Addressing risk preferences in cost-effectiveness analyses. , 2002, Applied health economics and health policy.

[56]  J. Bridges What can economics add to health technology assessment? Please not just another cost-effectiveness analysis! , 2006, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[57]  Dorte Gyrd-Hansen,et al.  International comparison of the definition and the practical application of health technology assessment , 2005, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[58]  J. Bridges,et al.  Condom avoidance and determinants of demand for male circumcision in Johannesburg, South Africa. , 2011, Health policy and planning.

[59]  Falls Church,et al.  HTA 101 INTRODUCTION TO HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT , 2004 .

[60]  Carin A Uyl-de Groot,et al.  Incorporating equity-efficiency interactions in cost-effectiveness analysis-three approaches applied to breast cancer control. , 2010, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[61]  K. Chalkidou,et al.  Comparative effectiveness research and evidence-based health policy: experience from four countries. , 2009, The Milbank quarterly.

[62]  D. Hailey Development of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[63]  Joseph T Sobota,et al.  Orphan Drug Act , 1990 .

[64]  S. Goodman,et al.  The methods of comparative effectiveness research. , 2012, Annual review of public health.

[65]  R. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Qualitative methods for assessing health care. , 1994, Quality in health care : QHC.

[66]  R. Steinbrook Saying no isn't NICE - the travails of Britain's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. , 2008, The New England journal of medicine.

[67]  M. Sculpher,et al.  Sins of omission and obfuscation: IQWIG's guidelines on economic evaluation methods. , 2010, Health economics.

[68]  Deborah Marshall,et al.  Conjoint Analysis Applications in Health — How are Studies being Designed and Reported? , 2010, The patient.

[69]  A. Gafni,et al.  On being NICE in the UK: guidelines for technology appraisal for the NHS in England and Wales. , 2002, Health economics.

[70]  M. Nasser,et al.  Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: Germany. , 2009, Issue brief.

[71]  Christopher Freeman,et al.  The economics of innovation , 1985 .

[72]  J. Strough,et al.  Decision‐making heuristics and biases across the life span , 2011, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[73]  Elizabeth T. Kinter,et al.  Things are Looking up Since We Started Listening to Patients , 2008, The patient.

[74]  K. Lancaster A New Approach to Consumer Theory , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[75]  S. Grosse Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold , 2008, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[76]  C. Mitton,et al.  Centralized drug review processes in Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United kingdom. , 2006, Health affairs.

[77]  Anthony J Culyer,et al.  National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgments , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[78]  M. Niezen,et al.  The Increasingly Complex Fourth Hurdle for Pharmaceuticals , 2007, PharmacoEconomics.

[80]  W. Brouwer,et al.  Rationalising rationing: economic and other considerations in the debate about funding of Viagra. , 2002, Health policy.

[81]  M. Drummond,et al.  PRIORITIZING INVESTMENTS IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT , 2000, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[82]  Hengjin Dong Methods of Economic Evaluation for the German Statutory Healthcare System , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[83]  Steven D Pearson,et al.  Quality, innovation, and value for money: NICE and the British National Health Service. , 2005, JAMA.

[84]  A. Gafni,et al.  Information created to evade reality (ICER): things we should not look to for answers. , 2006, PharmacoEconomics.

[85]  M. Ryan,et al.  A ROLE FOR CONJOINT ANALYSIS IN TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE? , 1999, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[86]  The Works and Correspondence of David Ricardo , 1952 .

[87]  F. Schubert HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT , 2002, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[88]  D. Menon,et al.  HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN CANADA , 2000, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[89]  Stuart Peacock,et al.  Social welfare and the Affordable Care Act: is it ever optimal to set aside comparative cost? , 2012, Social science & medicine.

[90]  John F. P. Bridges,et al.  Future challenges for the economic evaluation of healthcare , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[91]  Scott D Ramsey,et al.  Health technology assessment in health-care decisions in the United States. , 2009, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[92]  A Briggs,et al.  Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: the role of sensitivity analysis. , 1994, Health economics.

[93]  S. Rosen Hedonic Prices and Implicit Markets: Product Differentiation in Pure Competition , 1974, Journal of Political Economy.

[94]  P. Danzon,et al.  Setting cost-effectiveness thresholds as a means to achieve appropriate drug prices in rich and poor countries. , 2011, Health affairs.

[95]  C. McCabe,et al.  Orphan drugs and the NHS: should we value rarity? , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[96]  Steven D. Pinkerton,et al.  Ethical Issues in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. , 2002 .

[97]  A. Hauber Healthy-years equivalent: wounded but not yet dead , 2009, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[98]  John Stuart Mill,et al.  Principles of Political Economy: With Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy , 2000 .

[99]  Richard E. Caves,et al.  Patent Expiration, Entry, and Competition in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry , 1991 .

[100]  R N Battista,et al.  The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: reflections for the millennium. , 1999, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.

[101]  T. Flynn Valuing citizen and patient preferences in health: recent developments in three types of best–worst scaling , 2010, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[102]  Elias Mossialos,et al.  Health technology assessment and its influence on health-care priority setting , 2004, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[103]  P. Dolan,et al.  Valuing health states: a comparison of methods. , 1996, Journal of health economics.

[104]  J. Wennberg,et al.  Outcomes research, cost containment, and the fear of health care rationing. , 1990, The New England journal of medicine.

[105]  J. Louviere,et al.  Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[106]  Andrew Lloyd,et al.  Conjoint analysis applications in health--a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[107]  R. Busse,et al.  Analysing the impact of health-care system change in the EU member states--Germany. , 2005, Health economics.

[108]  David Hailey,et al.  TOWARD TRANSPARENCY IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT , 2003, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[109]  Henry G. Grabowski,et al.  Brand Loyalty, Entry, and Price Competition in Pharmaceuticals after the 1984 Drug Act , 1992, The Journal of Law and Economics.

[110]  J. Bridges,et al.  International experience with comparative effectiveness research: case studies from England/Wales and Germany. , 2010, Advances in health economics and health services research.

[111]  Hanane Khoury,et al.  Bridging Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and Efficient Health Care Decision Making with Multicriteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) , 2012, Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision Making.

[112]  C. Teljeur,et al.  ENDPOINTS FOR RELATIVE EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENT (REA) OF PHARMACEUTICALS , 2014, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[113]  D. Webb,et al.  Scottish Medicines Consortium: an Overview of Rapid New Drug Assessment in Scotland. , 2007, Scottish medical journal.

[114]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Methodological standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research: the PCORI perspective. , 2012, JAMA.

[115]  M. Aristides,et al.  Conjoint analysis of a new Chemotherapy: willingness to pay and preference for the features of raltitrexed versus standard therapy in advanced Colorectal Cancer. , 2002, PharmacoEconomics.

[116]  D. Menon,et al.  Role of patient and public participation in health technology assessment and coverage decisions , 2011, Expert review of pharmacoeconomics & outcomes research.

[117]  J. Hiller,et al.  Exploring policy-makers’ perspectives on disinvestment from ineffective healthcare practices , 2008, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[118]  M. Koopmanschap,et al.  Process utility from providing informal care: the benefit of caring. , 2005, Health policy.

[119]  Uwe Siebert,et al.  Methods, procedures, and contextual characteristics of health technology assessment and health policy decision making: Comparison of health technology assessment agencies in Germany, United Kingdom, France, and Sweden , 2009, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[120]  C. Antonelli The Economics of Innovation, New Technologies and Structural Change , 2002 .

[121]  Chris Henshall,et al.  USING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT TO SUPPORT OPTIMAL USE OF TECHNOLOGIES IN CURRENT PRACTICE: THE CHALLENGE OF “DISINVESTMENT” , 2012, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[122]  Adam Smith,et al.  An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations: A Selected Edition , 2008 .

[123]  D. Rennie,et al.  Pharmacoeconomic analyses: making them transparent, making them credible. , 2000, JAMA.

[124]  W. Brouwer,et al.  The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation: will it help German policy making? , 2010, Health economics.

[125]  D. Banta The development of health technology assessment. , 2003, Health policy.

[126]  John F P Bridges,et al.  Things are Looking up Since We Started Listening to Patients: Trends in the Application of Conjoint Analysis in Health 1982-2007. , 2008, The patient.

[127]  J. Richardson,et al.  Preferences for the normative basis of health care priority setting: some evidence from two countries. , 2013, Health Economics.

[128]  P. Shackley,et al.  Does "process utility" exist? A case study of willingness to pay for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. , 1997, Social science & medicine.

[129]  J. Robertson,et al.  Transparency in pricing arrangements for medicines listed on the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. , 2009, Australian health review : a publication of the Australian Hospital Association.

[130]  Matthew J. Liberatore,et al.  The analytic hierarchy process in medical and health care decision making: A literature review , 2008, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[131]  J. Bridges,et al.  Using comparative effectiveness research to inform decision-making: is there a role of economic evaluation? , 2012, Journal of comparative effectiveness research.

[132]  W. Reekie Price and Quality Competition in the United States Drug Industry , 1978 .

[133]  D. Feeny,et al.  The Health Utilities Index (HUI®) system for assessing health-related quality of life in clinical studies , 2001, Annals of medicine.

[134]  C. Mullins,et al.  Healthcare Rationing by Proxy , 2012, PharmacoEconomics.

[135]  S. Hawley Conjoint analysis: a 'new' way to evaluate patients' preferences. , 2008, The patient.

[136]  John F P Bridges,et al.  Patient-based health technology assessment: A vision of the future , 2007, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[137]  C. Donaldson,et al.  Valuing the benefits and costs of health care programmes: where's the 'extra' in extra-welfarism? , 2003, Social science & medicine.

[138]  Jill Sage,et al.  The Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. , 2014, Bulletin of the American College of Surgeons.

[139]  Karl Claxton,et al.  Searching for a threshold, not setting one: the role of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence , 2007, Journal of health services research & policy.