A review of cost-effectiveness analysis: From theory to clinical practice
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
0
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2023
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
Autores
ROCCA, Hans-Peter Brunner-La
LIMA, Antonio Carlos Pedroso de
Citação
MEDICINE, v.102, n.42, article ID e35614, 7p, 2023
Resumo
Cost-effectiveness analysis has long been practiced; registries date back to the United States of America War Department in 1886. In addition, everyone does intuitive cost-effectiveness analyses in their daily lives. In routine medical care, health economic assessment becomes increasingly important due to progressively limited resources, rising demands, population increases, and continuous therapeutic innovations. The health economic assessment must analyze the outcomes and costs of actions and technologies as objectively as possible to guarantee efficient assessment of novel interventions for Public Health Policy. In other words, it is necessary to determine how much society or patients are willing to or able to pay for novel interventions compared with existing alternatives, given the available resources. In addition, increased cost may displace other health care services already provided in case of fixed budget health care systems. To conduct such analyses, researchers must use standard methodologies and interpretations in light of regional characteristics according to social and economic determinants as well as clinical practice. Such an approach may be essential for transforming the current healthcare system to a value-based model. In this narrative review, concepts of the importance of and some approaches to health economic evaluation in clinical practice will be discussed.
Palavras-chave
bootstrapping and health policy, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, health economics, QALY
Referências
- Attema AE, 2018, PHARMACOECONOMICS, V36, P745, DOI 10.1007/s40273-018-0672-z
- Baltussen RMPM, 2002, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V18, P112
- Bodrogi J, 2010, BRIT J PHARMACOL, V159, P1367, DOI 10.1111/j.1476-5381.2009.00550.x
- Brasil. Ministerio da Saude. Secretaria de Ciencia Tecnologia e Insumos Estrategicos, 2014, Diretrizes metodologicas: diretriz de avaliacao economica
- BRIGGS A, 1994, HEALTH ECON, V3, P95, DOI 10.1002/hec.4730030206
- Briggs A., 2006, Decision Modelling for Health Economic Evaluation, VFirst ed, P256
- Briggs AH, 1997, HEALTH ECON, V6, P327, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199707)6:4<327::AID-HEC282>3.0.CO;2-W
- Briggs AH, 1999, STAT MED, V18, P3245, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19991215)18:23<3245::AID-SIM314>3.0.CO;2-2
- Briongos-Figuero S, 2020, ESC HEART FAIL, V7, P280, DOI 10.1002/ehf2.12548
- Buxton MJ, 1997, HEALTH ECON, V6, P217, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199705)6:3<217::AID-HEC267>3.3.CO;2-N
- Chapko MK, 2009, HEALTH ECON, V18, P1188, DOI 10.1002/hec.1422
- Cylus J., 2018, Health Systems for Prosperity and Solidarity Policy brief. Copenhagen: WHO Regional Office for Europe on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies
- Dieleman JL, 2017, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V318, P1668, DOI 10.1001/jama.2017.15927
- Docherty KF, 2017, EUR HEART J, V38, P338, DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehw427
- Drummond MF., 2006, Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, V3rd ed. Thrid ed, P464
- Drummond MF., 1980, Principles of Economic Appraisal in Health Care, P148
- Fenwick E, 2004, HEALTH ECON, V13, P405, DOI 10.1002/hec.903
- Fonarow GC, 2019, JAMA CARDIOL, V4, P691, DOI 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1647
- Gold MR., 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H, DOI 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780190492939.001.0001/acprof-9780190492939
- Brandao SMG, 2018, COST EFFECT RESOUR A, V16, DOI 10.1186/s12962-018-0158-z
- Gray AM., 2010, Applied methods of cost-effectiveness analysis in Healthcare
- Greene SJ, 2018, CIRCULATION, V138, P1039, DOI 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.034668
- Gurwitz JH, 2020, JAMA CARDIOL, V5, P247, DOI 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.5233
- Hutubessy RCW, 2001, HEALTH ECON, V10, P473, DOI 10.1002/hec.614
- Khatana SAM, 2019, JAMA CARDIOL, V4, P671, DOI 10.1001/jamacardio.2019.1651
- Manca A, 2005, HEALTH ECON, V14, P487, DOI 10.1002/hec.944
- MATTHEWS JNS, 1990, BRIT MED J, V300, P230, DOI 10.1136/bmj.300.6719.230
- Mccarthy J., 2019, Seven in 10 maintain negative view of U.S. healthcare system: gallup poll social series
- Meltzer MI, 2001, LANCET, V358, P993, DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06107-4
- Mooney CZ., 1993, Bootstrapping: a non-parametric approach to statistical inference, VFirst ed, P80
- National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, 2013, Guide to the methods of technology appraisal
- Neumann PJ, 2000, ANNU REV PUBL HEALTH, V21, P587, DOI 10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.587
- Papanicolas I, 2018, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V319, P1024, DOI 10.1001/jama.2018.1150
- Quade ES., 1971, A History of Cost-Effectiveness, P1
- Richardson G, 2004, HEALTH ECON, V13, P1203, DOI 10.1002/hec.901
- Sanders GD, 2016, JAMA-J AM MED ASSOC, V316, P1093, DOI 10.1001/jama.2016.12195
- Simoens S, 2010, INT J ENV RES PUB HE, V7, P1835, DOI 10.3390/ijerph7041835
- Stevens A, 2003, J PUBLIC HEALTH MED, V25, P98, DOI 10.1093/pubmed/fdg022
- Tan SS, 2009, EUR J HEALTH ECON, V10, P39, DOI 10.1007/s10198-008-0101-x
- The World Bank Report, International comparison program (ICP)
- U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2014, Guidelines for preparing economic analyses
- WAKKER P, 1995, HEALTH ECON, V4, P373, DOI 10.1002/hec.4730040503
- Whitehead SJ, 2010, BRIT MED BULL, V96, P5, DOI 10.1093/bmb/ldq033
- Zhao H., 2000, Estimating mean quality adjusted lifetime with censored data
- Zhao HW, 1999, BIOMETRICS, V55, P1101, DOI 10.1111/j.0006-341X.1999.01101.x