31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Balancing equity and efficiency in the Dutch basic benefits package using the principle of proportional shortfall

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Economic evaluations are increasingly used to inform decisions regarding the allocation of scarce health care resources. To systematically incorporate societal preferences into these evaluations, quality-adjusted life year gains could be weighted according to some equity principle, the most suitable of which is a matter of frequent debate. While many countries still struggle with equity concerns for priority setting in health care, the Netherlands has reached a broad consensus to use the concept of proportional shortfall. Our study evaluates the concept and its support in the Dutch health care context. We discuss arguments in the Netherlands for using proportional shortfall and difficulties in transitioning from principle to practice. In doing so, we address universal issues leading to a systematic consideration of equity concerns for priority setting in health care. The article thus has relevance to all countries struggling with the formalization of equity concerns for priority setting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references23

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis.

          The decisions made by the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) give rise to two questions: how is cost-effectiveness evidence used to make judgements about the 'value for money' of health technologies? And how are factors other than cost-effectiveness taken into account? The aim of this paper is to explore NICE's cost-effectiveness threshold(s) and the tradeoffs between cost effectiveness and other factors apparent in its decisions. Binary choice analysis is used to reveal the preferences of NICE and to consider the consistency of its decisions. For each decision to accept or reject a technology, explanatory variables include: the cost per life year or per QALY gained; uncertainty regarding cost effectiveness; the net cost to the NHS; the burden of disease; the availability (or not) of alternative treatments; and specific factors indicated by NICE. Results support the broad notion of a threshold, where the probability of rejection increases as the cost per QALY increases. Cost effectiveness, together with uncertainty and the burden of disease, explain NICE decisions better than cost effectiveness alone. The results suggest a threshold somewhat higher than NICEs stated 'range of acceptable cost effectiveness' of pound 20,000-30,000 British pounds per QALY--although the exact meaning of a 'range' in this context remains unclear. Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the 'fair innings' argument.

            Many different equity principles may need to be traded off against efficiency when prioritizing health care. This paper explores one of them: the concept of a 'fair innings'. It reflects the feeling that everyone is entitled to some 'normal' span of health (usually expressed in life years, e.g. 'three score years and ten') and anyone failing to achieve this has been cheated, whilst anyone getting more than this is 'living on borrowed time'. Four important characteristics of the 'fair innings' notion are worth noting: firstly, it is outcome based, not process-based or resource-based; secondly, it is about a person's whole life-time experience, not about their state at any particular point in time; thirdly, it reflects an aversion to inequality; and fourthly, it is quantifiable. Even in common parlance it is usually expressed in numerical terms: death at 25 is viewed very differently from death at 85. But age at death should be no more than a first approximation, because the quality of a person's life is important as well as its length. The analysis suggests that this notion of intergenerational equity requires greater discrimination against the elderly than would be dictated simply by efficiency objectives.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in australia (1991 to 1996).

              The principle aim of this study was to generate a league table of drugs considered by the Australian Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee (PBAC) for reimbursement. The table was used to test the hypothesis that decisions made by the PBAC are consistent with the maxim of economic efficiency. In addition, we explored whether the past decisions by the PBAC revealed a threshold incremental cost-effectiveness ratio beyond which the PBAC is not prepared to recommend reimbursement of a drug. All 355 submissions made to the PBAC between January 1991 and June 1996 were reviewed. Submissions using cost per life-year gained (26 submissions) or the cost per quality adjusted life-year (QALY) gained (9 submissions) were ranked in a league table and compared with advice given by the PBAC about that drug. The confidentiality restrictions for the submissions require that the individual drug details cannot be revealed in this article. There was a statistically significant difference between the cost per life-year gained for drugs that were recommended for listing and those that were not, suggesting that the PBAC has been broadly consistent with the use of economic efficiency as a criterion for decision making. We did not find an explicit threshold beyond which the PBAC was unwilling to pay for additional life years gained. However, between 1992 and 1996 the PBAC appears to have been unlikely to recommend a drug for listing if the additional cost per life-year exceeded 76 000 Australian dollars [$AU] (1998/1999 values) and was unlikely to reject a drug for which the additional cost per life-year gained was less than $AU42 000. The cost-effectiveness ratio was not the only factor determining the reimbursement decision. The results of this preliminary study indicate that decisions to recommend a drug for listing by the PBAC in the last few years have, by and large, been consistent with the notion of economic efficiency.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +31 10 408 2981 , +31 10 408 9094 , vandewetering@bmg.eur.nl
                Journal
                Eur J Health Econ
                Eur J Health Econ
                The European Journal of Health Economics
                Springer-Verlag (Berlin/Heidelberg )
                1618-7598
                1618-7601
                26 August 2011
                26 August 2011
                February 2013
                : 14
                : 1
                : 107-115
                Affiliations
                Institute for Medical Technology Assessment and Institute of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
                Article
                346
                10.1007/s10198-011-0346-7
                3535361
                21870179
                e2e28fcc-5411-404f-ade3-1baa2c6c8024
                © The Author(s) 2011
                History
                : 4 October 2010
                : 5 August 2011
                Categories
                Original Paper
                Custom metadata
                © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

                Economics of health & social care
                proportional shortfall,priority setting,equity,social value,resource allocation,i10,i18

                Comments

                Comment on this article