Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 1.952
Filtrar
Más filtros

Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Value Health ; 25(3): 419-426, 2022 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35227454

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To the best of our knowledge, no published clinical guidelines have ever undergone an economic evaluation to determine whether their implementation represented an efficient allocation of resources. Here, we perform an economic evaluation of national clinical guidelines designed to reduce unnecessary blood transfusions before, during, and after surgery published in 2012 by Australia's sole public blood provider, the National Blood Authority (NBA). METHODS: We performed a cost analysis from the government perspective, comparing the NBA's cost of implementing their perioperative patient blood management guidelines with the estimated resource savings in the years after publication. The impact on blood products, patient outcomes, and medication use were estimated for cardiac surgeries only using a large national registry. We adopted conservative counterfactual positions over a base-case 3-year time horizon with outcomes predicted from an interrupted time-series model controlling for differences in patient characteristics and hospitals. RESULTS: The estimated indexed cost of implementing the guidelines of A$1.5 million (2018-2019 financial year prices) was outweighed by the predicted blood products resource saving alone of A$5.1 million (95% confidence interval A$1.4 million-A$8.8 million) including savings of A$2.4 million, A$1.6 million, and A$1.2 million from reduced red blood cell, platelet, and fresh frozen plasma use, respectively. Estimated differences in patient outcomes were highly uncertain and estimated differences in medication were financially insignificant. CONCLUSIONS: Insofar as they led to a reduction in red blood cell, platelet, and fresh frozen plasma use during cardiac surgery, implementing the perioperative patient blood management guidelines represented an efficient use of the NBA's resources.


Asunto(s)
Transfusión Sanguínea/economía , Transfusión Sanguínea/normas , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Cardíacos/métodos , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto/normas , Australia , Transfusión de Componentes Sanguíneos/economía , Transfusión de Componentes Sanguíneos/normas , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/normas , Humanos , Análisis de Series de Tiempo Interrumpido , Evaluación de Resultado en la Atención de Salud
2.
Am J Respir Crit Care Med ; 204(2): 178-186, 2021 07 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33751910

RESUMEN

Rationale: Crisis standards of care (CSCs) guide critical care resource allocation during crises. Most recommend ranking patients on the basis of their expected in-hospital mortality using the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, but it is unknown how SOFA or other acuity scores perform among patients of different races. Objectives: To test the prognostic accuracy of the SOFA score and version 2 of the Laboratory-based Acute Physiology Score (LAPS2) among Black and white patients. Methods: We included Black and white patients admitted for sepsis or acute respiratory failure at 27 hospitals. We calculated the discrimination and calibration for in-hospital mortality of SOFA, LAPS2, and modified versions of each, including categorical SOFA groups recommended in a popular CSC and a SOFA score without creatinine to reduce the influence of race. Measurements and Main Results: Of 113,158 patients, 27,644 (24.4%) identified as Black. The LAPS2 demonstrated higher discrimination (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-0.77) than the SOFA score (AUC, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.68-0.69). The LAPS2 was also better calibrated than the SOFA score, but both underestimated in-hospital mortality for white patients and overestimated in-hospital mortality for Black patients. Thus, in a simulation using observed mortality, 81.6% of Black patients were included in lower-priority CSC categories, and 9.4% of all Black patients were erroneously excluded from receiving the highest prioritization. The SOFA score without creatinine reduced racial miscalibration. Conclusions: Using SOFA in CSCs may lead to racial disparities in resource allocation. More equitable mortality prediction scores are needed.


Asunto(s)
Negro o Afroamericano/estadística & datos numéricos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Equidad en Salud/economía , Equidad en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Mortalidad Hospitalaria/tendencias , Población Blanca/estadística & datos numéricos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , California/epidemiología , Estudios de Cohortes , Femenino , Predicción , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Factores Raciales , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/economía , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/epidemiología , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria/terapia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Sepsis/economía , Sepsis/epidemiología , Sepsis/terapia
3.
Am J Public Health ; 111(1): 150-158, 2021 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33211582

RESUMEN

Objectives. To optimize combined public and private spending on HIV prevention to achieve maximum reductions in incidence.Methods. We used a national HIV model to estimate new infections from 2018 to 2027 in the United States. We estimated current spending on HIV screening, interventions that move persons with diagnosed HIV along the HIV care continuum, pre-exposure prophylaxis, and syringe services programs. We compared the current funding allocation with 2 optimal scenarios: (1) a limited-reach scenario with expanded efforts to serve eligible persons and (2) an ideal, unlimited-reach scenario in which all eligible persons could be served.Results. A continuation of the current allocation projects 331 000 new HIV cases over the next 10 years. The limited-reach scenario reduces that number by 69%, and the unlimited reach scenario by 94%. The most efficient funding allocations resulted in prompt diagnosis and sustained viral suppression through improved screening of high-risk persons and treatment adherence support for those infected.Conclusions. Optimal allocations of public and private funds for HIV prevention can achieve substantial reductions in new infections. Achieving reductions of more than 90% under current funding will require that virtually all infected receive sustained treatment.


Asunto(s)
Administración Financiera/organización & administración , Infecciones por VIH/prevención & control , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Modelos Econométricos , Síndrome de Inmunodeficiencia Adquirida/prevención & control , Adolescente , Adulto , Femenino , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Programas de Intercambio de Agujas/economía , Profilaxis Pre-Exposición/economía , Estados Unidos , Adulto Joven
4.
Value Health ; 24(3): 388-396, 2021 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33641773

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Various strategies to address healthcare spending and medical costs continue to be debated and implemented in the United States. To date, these efforts have failed to adequately contain the growth of healthcare cost. An alternative strategy that has elicited rising interest among policymakers is budget caps. As budget caps become more prevalent, it is important to identify which features are needed to ensure success, both in terms of cost reduction and health improvement. METHODS: We explored the impacts of different features of budget caps by comparing hypothetical service level and global budget caps across 3 annual budget cap growth strategies over a 10-year timeframe in 2005-2015 for 8 of the most commonly occurring conditions in the United States. Health was assessed by a measure of disease burden (disability-adjusted life years). RESULTS: The results indicate that budget caps have the potential for creating savings but can also result in patient harm if not designed well. As a result of these findings, 5 principles were developed for designing budget caps and should guide the use of budget caps to address medical spending. CONCLUSIONS: As public discussion grows about the use of budget caps to constrain health spending, it is critical to recognize that the budget cap design and the resulting healthcare provider behavior will determine whether there is potential harm to public health. Budget cap design should consider variability at the condition level, including patient population, improvements in health, treatment costs, and the innovations available, to both create savings and maximize patient health. In assessing the impact of healthcare spending caps on costs and disease burden, we demonstrate that budget cap design determines potential harm to public health.


Asunto(s)
Presupuestos/estadística & datos numéricos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Medicamentos bajo Prescripción/economía , Control de Costos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Gastos en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Estados Unidos
5.
Health Econ ; 30(2): 470-477, 2021 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33184985

RESUMEN

During the COVID-19 pandemic, health care systems around the world have received additional funding, while at other times, financial support has been lowered to consolidate public spending. Such budget changes likely affect provision behavior in health care. We study how different degrees of resource scarcity affect medical service provision and, in consequence, patients' health. In a controlled lab environment, physicians are paid by capitation and allocate limited resources to several patients. This implies a trade-off between physicians' profits and patients' health benefits. We vary levels of resource scarcity and patient characteristics systematically and observe that most subjects in the role of physician devote a relatively stable share of budget to patient treatment, implying that they provide fewer services when they face more severe budget constraints. Average patient benefits decrease in proportion to physician budgets. The majority of subjects chooses an allocation that leads to equal patient benefits as opposed to allocating resources efficiently.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19/epidemiología , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Médicos/economía , Presupuestos/organización & administración , Eficiencia Organizacional , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Equidad en Salud/economía , Humanos , Modelos Teóricos , Pandemias , SARS-CoV-2 , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad
6.
Nature ; 580(7805): 578-580, 2020 04.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32273621
7.
Value Health ; 23(1): 17-24, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952668

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether the use of economic evaluation (EE) in healthcare decision making is influenced by the social values and institutional context in a given country. METHODS: We developed and tested a conceptual framework for the 36 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries. The countries were divided into two groups based on the extent of their use of EE in drug reimbursement. The key social values were efficiency, equity, and personal responsibility, measured in an international survey. Countries were classified based on their institutional context in terms of their general welfare paradigm/type of healthcare system and the administrative tradition to which they belong. We performed correlation tests and ran path analysis regression models to test our hypotheses. RESULTS: EE high users included significantly more Beveridge-type systems (50% vs 31%) and fewer Bismarck-type (15% vs 56%). Napoleonic tradition countries seemed to reject personal responsibility in health (r = -0.511, P = .009), whereas Germanic tradition countries embraced it (r = 0.572, P = .003); Anglo-American tradition countries exhibited a significant association with efficiency (r = 0.444, P = .026), whereas Scandinavian tradition countries appeared to reject it as a criterion for rationing in healthcare (r = -0.454, P = .023). No significant direct association was found between social values and use of EE. CONCLUSION: Our exploratory analysis suggests that institutional context and, indirectly, social values may play a role in shaping the use of EE in healthcare decision making. Because of the differences among countries in terms of institutional context, which may in part be influenced by social values, it is unlikely that there will ever be a single, harmonious approach to the use of EE.


Asunto(s)
Conducta de Elección , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Valores Sociales , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , Organización para la Cooperación y el Desarrollo Económico , Formulación de Políticas , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/organización & administración
8.
Value Health ; 23(1): 25-31, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952669

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The economic evaluation of healthcare technologies has become in many countries a basic tool for reimbursement, pricing and purchasing decisions. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to examine the institutional, legal, and political factors that have impeded the application of economic evaluation and the criterion of efficiency in the process of pricing and reimbursement of new medicines in Spain. METHODS: Narrative description of the current institutional framework for the use of economic evaluation in pricing and reimbursement in Spain, legal and policy framework in the field of evaluation of new medicines, and stakeholder initiatives and policies related to the use of economic evaluation outside of the pricing and reimbursement process. RESULTS: Spain has an institutional framework created and established over the last years that could have facilitated a formal use of economic evaluation in the process of pricing and reimbursement. Nevertheless, the real use of economic evaluation at the central or regional level is still unknown, although application of the efficiency criterion, linking to cost-effectiveness, has been clearly required by Spanish laws and regulations at the national level. We highlight a certain degree of moral hazard from the central government that is not directly responsible for the budget impact of reimbursement and pricing decisions. There are currently a number of ongoing initiatives in the field of economic evaluation by various agents, but they remain uncoordinated. CONCLUSIONS: Poor governance at the highest level of decision making is the main reason for the lack of interest in economic evaluation. A profound political change, supported by transparency and accountability, is required before the criterion of efficiency can be fully considered in the process of pricing and reimbursement of new medicines in Spain.


Asunto(s)
Costos de los Medicamentos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Regulación Gubernamental , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Humanos , Formulación de Políticas , Política , España , Participación de los Interesados
9.
Value Health ; 23(2): 139-150, 2020 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113617

RESUMEN

Healthcare resource allocation decisions made under conditions of uncertainty may turn out to be suboptimal. In a resource constrained system in which there is a fixed budget, these suboptimal decisions will result in health loss. Consequently, there may be value in reducing uncertainty, through the collection of new evidence, to make better resource allocation decisions. This value can be quantified using a value of information (VOI) analysis. This report, from the ISPOR VOI Task Force, introduces VOI analysis, defines key concepts and terminology, and outlines the role of VOI for supporting decision making, including the steps involved in undertaking and interpreting VOI analyses. The report is specifically aimed at those tasked with making decisions about the adoption of healthcare or the funding of healthcare research. The report provides a number of recommendations for good practice when planning, undertaking, or reviewing the results of VOI analyses.


Asunto(s)
Presupuestos , Toma de Decisiones , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Costos de los Medicamentos , Desarrollo de Medicamentos/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Investigación sobre Servicios de Salud/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Humanos , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Modelos Económicos , Modelos Estadísticos , Formulación de Políticas , Seguro de Salud Basado en Valor/economía , Compra Basada en Calidad/economía
10.
Value Health ; 23(2): 154-156, 2020 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113619

RESUMEN

Value-based pharmaceutical contracts (VBPCs) are performance-based reimbursement agreements between healthcare payers and pharmaceutical manufacturers in which the price, amount, or nature of reimbursement is tied to value-based outcomes. VBPCs are often complex, and the nature of who benefits and in what ways can be unclear. We discuss how VBPCs compare with value-based payer-provider arrangements in terms of performance-based reimbursements and alignment of incentives. In addition, we examine how VBPCs can affect costs, clinical outcomes, and access to medications. Because these contracts are unlikely to reduce costs in isolation, we recommend taking a patient-centered approach when developing VBPCs and tying VBPCs to more overarching payer drug cost reduction strategies.


Asunto(s)
Contratos/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos , Industria Farmacéutica/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Seguro de Salud Basado en Valor/economía , Compra Basada en Calidad/economía , Ahorro de Costo , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Gastos en Salud , Accesibilidad a los Servicios de Salud/economía , Humanos , Formulación de Políticas
11.
Value Health ; 23(1): 3-9, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952670

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Social scientists have paid increasing attention to health technology assessment (HTA). This paper provides an overview of existing social scientific literature on HTA, with a focus on sociology and political science and their subfields. METHODS: Narrative review of key pieces in English. RESULTS: Three broad themes recur in the emerging social science literature on HTA: the drivers of the establishment and concrete institutional designs of HTA bodies; the effects of institutionalized HTA on pricing and reimbursement systems and the broader society; and the social and political influences on HTA decisions. CONCLUSION: Social scientists bring a focus on institutions and social actors involved in HTA, using primarily small-N research designs and qualitative methods. They provide valuable critical perspectives on HTA, at times challenging its otherwise unquestioned assumptions. However, they often leave aside questions important to the HTA practitioner community, including the role of culture and values. Closer collaboration could be beneficial to tackle new relevant questions pertaining to HTA.


Asunto(s)
Conducta de Elección , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Política , Ciencias Sociales/economía , Valores Sociales , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , Formulación de Políticas , Ciencias Sociales/organización & administración , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/organización & administración
12.
Value Health ; 23(1): 43-51, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952673

RESUMEN

In April 2019, Japan formally introduced health technology assessment (HTA) and, more specifically, a cost-effectiveness analysis, to inform healthcare decision making, mainly when it comes to the pricing of new technologies. This article provides an overview of this new policy, which was implemented formally after a pilot program. In the fiscal year (FY) 2012, discussions on cost-effectiveness assessments were initiated in Japan. After 7 years of deliberations, a cost-effectiveness assessment was implemented formally in April 2019. In Japan, the cost-effectiveness analysis has been used to inform price adjustments of healthcare technologies, although it has not yet been used for decision making on insurance coverage. Selection criteria were established because not all drugs and medical devices could be evaluated owing to a shortage of experts. Exclusion criteria have also been applied to prevent access restriction. The scope of the evaluation's price adjustment target is limited to part of the product price. If the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) threshold falls below ¥5 million per QALY, the price adjustment rate changes stepwise according to the cost per QALY. In addition to price reduction, a price-raising scheme has also been implemented for scenarios where products are evaluated to be highly cost-effective and innovative. This article describes the first formally implemented HTA system in Japan. Although it is too early to make any conclusions about its effect, the Japan-specific context makes this system unique. To fully understand the opportunities and challenges of the new system, it is vital that Japan accumulates experience with this system and develops human resources in health economic evaluation.


Asunto(s)
Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Regulación Gubernamental , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Humanos , Japón , Formulación de Políticas , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Valores Sociales , Participación de los Interesados
13.
Value Health ; 23(3): 277-286, 2020 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32197720

RESUMEN

The allocation of healthcare resources among competing priorities requires an assessment of the expected costs and health effects of investing resources in the activities and of the opportunity cost of the expenditure. To date, much effort has been devoted to assessing the expected costs and health effects, but there remains an important need to also reflect the consequences of uncertainty in resource allocation decisions and the value of further research to reduce uncertainty. Decision making with uncertainty may turn out to be suboptimal, resulting in health loss. Consequently, there may be value in reducing uncertainty, through the collection of new evidence, to better inform resource decisions. This value can be quantified using value of information (VOI) analysis. This report from the ISPOR VOI Task Force describes methods for computing 4 VOI measures: the expected value of perfect information, expected value of partial perfect information (EVPPI), expected value of sample information (EVSI), and expected net benefit of sampling (ENBS). Several methods exist for computing EVPPI and EVSI, and this report provides guidance on selecting the most appropriate method based on the features of the decision problem. The report provides a number of recommendations for good practice when planning, undertaking, or reviewing VOI analyses. The software needed to compute VOI is discussed, and areas for future research are highlighted.


Asunto(s)
Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Prioridades en Salud/economía , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/economía , Modelos Estadísticos , Evaluación de Necesidades/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Consenso , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Costos de la Atención en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Prioridades en Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Evaluación de Necesidades/estadística & datos numéricos , Probabilidad , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/estadística & datos numéricos , Incertidumbre
14.
Value Health ; 23(3): 335-342, 2020 03.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32197729

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Studies have shown a consistent impact of socioeconomic status at birth for both mother and child; however, no study has looked at its impact on hospital efficiency and financial balance at birth, which could be major if newborns from disadvantaged families have an average length of stay (LOS) longer than other newborns. Our objective was therefore to study the association between socioeconomic status and hospital efficiency and financial balance in that population. METHODS: A study was carried out using exhaustive national hospital discharge databases. All live births in a maternity hospital located in mainland France between 2012 and 2014 were included. Socioeconomic status was estimated with an ecological indicator and efficiency by variations in patient LOS compared with different mean national LOS. Financial balance was assessed at the admission level through the ratio of production costs and revenues and at the hospital level by the difference in aggregated revenues and production costs for said hospital. Multivariate regression models studied the association between those indicators and socioeconomic status. RESULTS: A total of 2 149 454 births were included. LOS was shorter than the national means for less disadvantaged patients and longer for the more disadvantaged patients, which increased when adjusted for gestational age, birth weight, and severity. A 1% increase in disadvantaged patients in a hospital's case mix significantly increased the probability that the hospital would be in deficit by 2.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Reforms should be made to hospital payment methods to take into account patient socioeconomic status so as to improve resource allocation efficiency.


Asunto(s)
Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Precios de Hospital , Costos de Hospital , Hospitalización/economía , Maternidades/economía , Complicaciones del Embarazo/economía , Complicaciones del Embarazo/terapia , Clase Social , Presupuestos , Bases de Datos Factuales , Femenino , Francia , Necesidades y Demandas de Servicios de Salud/economía , Humanos , Recién Nacido , Tiempo de Internación/economía , Masculino , Modelos Económicos , Evaluación de Necesidades/economía , Admisión del Paciente/economía , Alta del Paciente/economía , Embarazo , Complicaciones del Embarazo/diagnóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Tiempo
15.
Value Health ; 23(2): 171-179, 2020 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113622

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Universal healthcare coverage in low- and middle-income countries requires challenging resource allocation decisions. Health technology assessment is one important tool to support such decision making. The International Decision Support Initiative worked with the Ghanaian Ministry of Health to strengthen health technology assessment capacity building, identifying hypertension as a priority topic area for a relevant case study. METHODS: Based on guidance from a national technical working group of researchers and policy makers, an economic evaluation and budget impact analysis were undertaken for the main antihypertensive medicines used for uncomplicated, essential hypertension. The analysis aimed to address specific policy questions relevant to the National Health Insurance Scheme. RESULTS: The evaluation found that first-line management of essential hypertension with diuretics has an incremental cost per disability-adjusted life-year avoided of GH¢ 276 ($179 in 2017, 4% of gross national income per capita) compared with no treatment. Calcium channel blockers were more effective than diuretics but at a higher incremental cost: GH¢ 11 061 per disability-adjusted life-year avoided ($7189 in 2017; 160% of gross national income per capita). Diuretics provide better health outcomes at a lower cost than angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, or beta-blockers. Budget impact analysis highlighted the potential for cost saving through enhanced price negotiation and increased use of better-value drugs. We also illustrate how savings could be reinvested to improve population health. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evaluation enabled decision makers to assess hypertension medicines in a Ghanaian context and estimate the impact of using such evidence to change policy. This study contributes to addressing challenges associated with the drive for universal healthcare coverage in the context of constrained budgets.


Asunto(s)
Antihipertensivos/economía , Antihipertensivos/uso terapéutico , Presión Sanguínea/efectos de los fármacos , Costos de los Medicamentos , Hipertensión Esencial/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipertensión Esencial/economía , Medicina Basada en la Evidencia/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Evaluación de Procesos y Resultados en Atención de Salud/economía , Formulación de Políticas , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Antihipertensivos/efectos adversos , Presupuestos , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Hipertensión Esencial/epidemiología , Hipertensión Esencial/fisiopatología , Femenino , Ghana/epidemiología , Estado de Salud , Humanos , Masculino , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento
16.
Value Health ; 23(2): 191-199, 2020 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113624

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Changes in the regulatory context enable faster approval of transformative medicines. They also lead to health technology assessment (HTA) agencies having to make decisions with less evidence. In response, HTA agencies have also initiated forms of conditional approval. When the evidence base for a new oncology treatment leaves substantial uncertainty, the new Cancer Drugs Fund allows the National Institute for Heath and Care Excellence to give the manufacturer two options: (1) offer a low price based on conservative assumptions and obtain immediate approval ("stick") or (2) wait until the evidence base has further matured before finalizing a potentially higher agreed price ("twist"). OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this article is to explain how, using the theoretical framework of the expected value of sample information, simulation methods can help inform a manufacturer's decisions when faced with the option to stick or twist. METHODS: We first summarize a general model to help frame the manufacturer's negotiating strategy. We then use a motivating case study, based on a hypothetical immunotherapy, to illustrate how manufacturers can use simulation methods to robustly characterize the uncertainty inherent to further data collection and incorporate this uncertainty within their decision making. RESULTS: Our approach allows us to estimate the commercial value of generating additional data (the difference between the estimated net present value of stick and twist). We test the sensitivity of the results to different assumptions via scenario analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This article shows that simulation methods can be used to help pharmaceutical managers make informed strategic decisions in contexts of uncertainty.


Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/economía , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Presupuestos , Contratos/economía , Toma de Decisiones , Técnicas de Apoyo para la Decisión , Aprobación de Drogas/economía , Costos de los Medicamentos , Desarrollo de Medicamentos/economía , Negociación , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Antineoplásicos Inmunológicos/efectos adversos , Simulación por Computador , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Humanos , Modelos Económicos , Modelos Estadísticos , Formulación de Políticas , Resultado del Tratamiento , Incertidumbre
17.
Value Health ; 23(2): 200-208, 2020 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32113625

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: To identify how monetary incentives affect influenza vaccination uptake rate using a randomized control experiment and to subsequently design an optimal incentive program in Singapore, a high-income country with a market-based healthcare system. METHODS: 4000 people aged ≥65 were randomly assigned to 4 treatment groups (1000 each) and were offered a monetary incentive (in shopping vouchers) if they chose to participate. The baseline group was invited to complete a questionnaire with incentives of 10 Singapore dollars (SGD; where 1 SGD ≈ 0.73 USD), whereas the other three groups were invited to complete the questionnaire and be vaccinated against influenza at their own cost of around 32 SGD, in return for incentives of 10, 20, or 30 SGD. RESULTS: Increasing the total incentive for vaccination and reporting from 10 to 20 SGD increased participation in vaccination from 4.5% to 7.5% (P < .001). Increasing the total incentive from 20 to 30 SGD increased the participation rate to 9.2%, but this was not statistically significantly different from a 20-SGD incentive. The group of nonworking elderly were more sensitive to changes in incentives than those who worked. In addition to working status, the effects of increasing incentives on influenza vaccination rates differed by ethnicity, socio-economic status, household size, and a measure of social resilience. There were no significant differential effects by age group, gender, or education, however. The cost of the program per completed vaccination under a 20-SGD incentive is 36.80 SGD, which was the lowest among the three intervention arms. For a hypothetical population-level financial incentive program to promote influenza vaccination among the elderly, accounting for transmission dynamics, an incentive between 10 and 20 SGD minimizes the cost per completed vaccination from both governmental and health system perspectives. CONCLUSIONS: Appropriate monetary incentives can boost influenza vaccination rates. Increasing monetary incentives for vaccination from 10 to 20 SGD can improve the influenza vaccination uptake rate, but further increasing the monetary incentive to 30 SGD results in no additional gains. A partial incentive may therefore be considered to improve vaccination coverage in this high-risk group.


Asunto(s)
Costos de los Medicamentos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Servicios de Salud para Ancianos/economía , Programas de Inmunización/economía , Vacunas contra la Influenza/administración & dosificación , Vacunas contra la Influenza/economía , Vacunación Masiva/economía , Aceptación de la Atención de Salud , Régimen de Recompensa , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Femenino , Gastos en Salud , Conocimientos, Actitudes y Práctica en Salud , Humanos , Vacunas contra la Influenza/efectos adversos , Masculino , Vacunación Masiva/efectos adversos , Motivación , Evaluación de Programas y Proyectos de Salud , Singapur
18.
Value Health ; 23(1): 10-16, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952664

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Health technology assessment (HTA) plays an important role in reimbursement decision-making in many countries, but recommendations vary widely throughout jurisdictions, even for the same drug. This variation may be due to differences in the weighing of evidence or differences in the processes or procedures, which are known as HTA practices. OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into the effects of differences in practices on interpretation of intercountry differences in HTA recommendations for conditionally approved drugs. METHODS: HTA recommendations for conditionally approved drugs (N = 27) up until June 2017 from England/Wales, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and Scotland were included. Recommendations and practice characteristics were extracted from these five jurisdictions and this data was validated. The effect of nonsubmissions, resubmissions, and reassessments; cost-effectiveness assessments; and price negotiations on changes in the percentage of negative recommendations and the interpretation of intercountry differences in HTA outcomes were analyzed using Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: The inclusion of cost-effectiveness assessments led to significant increases in the proportion of negative recommendations in England/Wales (from 4% to 50%, P<.01) and Scotland (from 21% to 71%, P<.01). The subsequent inclusion of price negotiations led to significant reductions in the proportion of negative recommendations in England/Wales (from 50% to 14%, P<.01), France (from 31% to 3%, P=.012), and Germany (from 34% to 0%, P<.01). Results indicated that the inclusion of nonsubmissions and resubmissions might affect Scottish negative HTA recommendations (from 7% to 21%), but this effect was not significant. No significant effects were observed in the Netherlands, possibly owing to sample size. CONCLUSION: Variations in HTA practices between international jurisdictions can have a substantial and significant impact on conclusions about recommendations by HTA bodies, as exemplified in this cohort of conditionally approved products. Studies comparing international HTA recommendations should carefully consider possible practice variations between jurisdictions.


Asunto(s)
Conducta de Elección , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Comparación Transcultural , Tecnología Culturalmente Apropiada/economía , Asistencia Sanitaria Culturalmente Competente/economía , Europa (Continente) , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , Formulación de Políticas , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina/organización & administración , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/organización & administración
19.
Value Health ; 23(1): 32-38, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952671

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Some studies in the Netherlands have gauged public views on principles for healthcare priority setting, but they fall short of comprehensively explaining the public disapproval of several recent reimbursement decisions. OBJECTIVE: To obtain insight into citizens' preferences and identify the criteria they would propose for decisions pertaining to the benefits package of basic health insurance. METHODS: Twenty-four Dutch citizens were selected for participation in a Citizen Forum, which involved 3 weekends. Deliberations took place in small groups and in plenary, guided by 2 moderators, on the basis of 8 preselected case studies, which participants later compared and prioritized under the premise that not all treatments can or need to be reimbursed. Participants received opportunities to inform themselves through written brochures and live interactions with 3 experts. RESULTS: The Citizen Forum identified 16 criteria for inclusion or exclusion of treatments in the benefits package; they relate to the condition (2 criteria), treatment (11 criteria), and individual characteristics of those affected by the condition (3 criteria). In most case studies, it was a combination of criteria that determined whether or not participants favored inclusion of the treatment under consideration in the benefits package. Participants differed in their opinion about the relative importance of criteria, and they had difficulty in operationalizing and trading off criteria to provide a recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: Informed citizens are prepared to make and, to a certain extent, capable of making reasoned choices about the reimbursement of health services. They realize that choices are both necessary and possible. Broad public support and understanding for making tough choices regarding the benefits package of basic health insurance is not automatic: it requires an investment.


Asunto(s)
Costos de los Medicamentos , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Política de Salud/economía , Reembolso de Seguro de Salud/economía , Opinión Pública , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Atención de Salud Universal , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud/economía , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Regulación Gubernamental , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Humanos , Países Bajos , Prioridad del Paciente , Formulación de Políticas , Política , Participación de los Interesados , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/organización & administración , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud/organización & administración
20.
Value Health ; 23(1): 39-42, 2020 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31952672

RESUMEN

India is a diverse land with different cultures, social norms, castes, religions, faiths, languages, politics, and a complex healthcare system. As a step to enhance healthcare, the government of India announced a move toward universal health coverage to increase accessibility and affordability of health-related services. Recently, there has been an introduction of health technology assessment (HTA) in India to help inform evidence-based decision making in cases of limited resources and budgets. Nevertheless, there are challenges related to biased decision making, an unregulated healthcare framework, and the lack of data and capacity that will (directly or indirectly) affect the use of HTA in India. For HTA to be successful in India and in similar low- and middle-income countries, it is important that the decision makers acknowledge these challenges and embrace differences in ideologies, cultures, and politics instead of ignoring them. Drawing lessons from countries with well-developed HTA bodies may help, but these need to be modified for the country-specific context. Ensuring quality and transparency is key to building trust in medical decision making. Improved coordination at all levels of healthcare is vital to ensure the long-term success of HTA in India. This is challenging but achievable by spreading awareness among stakeholders and achieving moderate health-sector regulation that can combat corruption. HTA will prosper in India if it incorporates cultural and institutional diversity, alongside tackling socioeconomic inequalities.


Asunto(s)
Conducta de Elección , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud , Política de Salud , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica , Atención de Salud Universal , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud , Toma de Decisiones Clínicas , Análisis Costo-Beneficio , Tecnología Culturalmente Apropiada , Asistencia Sanitaria Culturalmente Competente , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/economía , Asignación de Recursos para la Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Política de Salud/economía , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/economía , Disparidades en Atención de Salud/organización & administración , Humanos , India , Formulación de Políticas , Calidad de Vida , Años de Vida Ajustados por Calidad de Vida , Valores Sociales , Participación de los Interesados , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/economía , Evaluación de la Tecnología Biomédica/organización & administración , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud/economía , Cobertura Universal del Seguro de Salud/organización & administración
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA