On what basis are medical cost-effectiveness thresholds set? Clashing opinions and an absence of data: a systematic review
Top Cited Papers
Open Access
- 1 January 2018
- journal article
- review article
- Published by Informa UK Limited in Global Health Action
- Vol. 11 (1), 1447828
- https://doi.org/10.1080/16549716.2018.1447828
Abstract
Background: The amount a government should be willing to invest in adopting new medical treatments has long been under debate. With many countries using formal cost-effectiveness (C/E) thresholds when examining potential new treatments and ever-growing medical costs, accurately setting the level of a C/E threshold can be essential for an efficient healthcare system. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to describe the prominent approaches to setting a C/E threshold, compile available national-level C/E threshold data and willingness-to-pay (WTP) data, and to discern whether associations exist between these values, gross domestic product (GDP) and health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE). This review further examines current obstacles faced with the presently available data. Methods: A systematic review was performed to collect articles which have studied national C/E thresholds and willingness-to-pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the general population. Associations between GDP, HALE, WTP, and C/E thresholds were analyzed with correlations. Results: Seventeen countries were identified from nine unique sources to have formal C/E thresholds within our inclusion criteria. Thirteen countries from nine sources were identified to have WTP per QALY data within our inclusion criteria. Two possible associations were identified: C/E thresholds with HALE (quadratic correlation of 0.63), and C/E thresholds with GDP per capita (polynomial correlation of 0.84). However, these results are based on few observations and therefore firm conclusions cannot be made. Conclusions: Most national C/E thresholds identified in our review fall within the WHO’s recommended range of one-to-three times GDP per capita. However, the quality and quantity of data available regarding national average WTP per QALY, opportunity costs, and C/E thresholds is poor in comparison to the importance of adequate investment in healthcare. There exists an obvious risk that countries might either over- or underinvest in healthcare if they base their decision-making process on erroneous presumptions or non-evidence-based methodologies. The commonly referred to value of 100,000$ USD per QALY may potentially have some basis.Keywords
This publication has 39 references indexed in Scilit:
- Estimating the willingness to pay for a quality-adjusted life year in Thailand: does the context of health gain matter?ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research, 2013
- WTP for a QALY and health states: More money for severer health states?Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, 2013
- Inquiry into the Relationship between Equity Weights and the Value of the QALYValue in Health, 2012
- VALUING QALY GAINS BY APPLYING A SOCIETAL PERSPECTIVEHealth Economics, 2012
- Searchers vs surveyors in estimating the monetary value of a QALY: resolving a nasty dilemma for NICEHealth Economics, Policy and Law, 2011
- Using threshold values for cost per quality-adjusted life-year gained in healthcare decisionsInternational Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 2011
- Trying to estimate a monetary value for the QALYJournal of Health Economics, 2009
- Willingness to Pay for a QALYPharmacoEconomics, 2005
- Effectiveness and costs of interventions to lower systolic blood pressure and cholesterol: a global and regional analysis on reduction of cardiovascular-disease riskThe Lancet, 2003
- Differences in Attitudes, Knowledge and Use of Economic Evaluations in Decision-Making in The NetherlandsPharmacoEconomics, 2000