Is the aim of the English health care system to maximize QALYs?

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 17, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 157-163

  Shah, Koonal ^a   Praet, Cecile ^a   Devlin, Nancy ^a   Sussex, Jonathan ^a   Appleby, John ^b   Parkin, David ^c  

^a OFFICE OF HEALTH ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^b KING S FUND   (United Kingdom)

^c NHS South East Coast ^*  (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BUDGET; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY ADJUSTED LIFE YEAR; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; THEMATIC ANALYSIS;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ENGLAND; GOVERNMENT AGENCIES; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; ORGANIZATIONAL OBJECTIVES; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; STATE MEDICINE;

EID: 84864408662     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.011098     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Department of Health website. http://www.dh.gov.uk/health/about-us/, (last accessed 9 October 2011)
2. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence website. http://www.nice.org.uk/aboutnice/, (last accessed 9 October 2011)
3. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Guide to the methods of technology appraisal. London, 2008. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/B52/A7/TAMethodsGuideUpdatedJune2008.pdf
4. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Social value judgements: principles for the development of NICE guidance (second ed). London, 2008. Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/media/C18/30/SVJ2PUBLICATION2008.pdf
5. Rawlins M, Barnett D, Stevens A. Pharmacoeconomics: NICE's approach to decision making. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2010;70:346-9
6. Devlin N, Sussex J. Incorporating multiple criteria in health technology appraisal: methods and processes. London: Office of Health Economics, 2011
7. Devlin N, Parkin D. Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis. Health Econ 2004;13:437-52 (Pubitemid 38660393)
8. Devlin N, Dakin H, Rice N, Parkin D, O'Neill P. The influence of cost effectiveness and other factors on NICE decisions. Paper presented to HESG, York, January 2011
9. Department of Health website. http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics/Legislation/Regulatoryimpactassessment/index.htm, (last accessed 9 October 2011)
10. Knapp MRJ. The economics of social care. London: Macmillan, 1984
11. Brouwer WBF, Culyer AJ, van Exel NJA, Rutten FFH. Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism. J Health Econ 2008;27:325-38
12. Culyer AJ. The normative economics of health care finance and provision. In: McGuire A, Fenn P, Mayhew K. (eds) Providing health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991
13. Tsuchiya A, Williams A. Welfare economics and economic evaluation. In: McGuire A, Drummond M. (eds) Economics evaluation in health care: merging theory with practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001
14. Burge P, Devlin N, Appleby J, Grant J, Rohr C. Do patients always prefer quicker treatment? A discrete choice analysis of patients' stated preferences in the London Patient Choice Project. Appl Health Econ Policy Anal 2004;3: 183-94 (Pubitemid 41018286)
15. Dolan P, Shaw R, Tsuchiya A, Williams A. QALY maximisation and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature. Health Econ 2005;14:197-208 (Pubitemid 40253634)
16. Department of Health. A new value-based approach to the pricing of branded medicines - a consultation. London, 2010
17. Department of Health. Impact Assessments: Department of Health - Publications [online]. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Publicationsandstatistics/Legislation/Regulatoryimpactassessment/index.htm(last accessed 9 December 2011)
18. Pope C, Mays N. Qualitative research in health care. Oxford: Blackwell, 2006
19. Department of Health. Policy Appraisal and Health. London, 2004. Available at: (www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/@dh/@en/ documents/digitalasset/dh-4095414.pdf)
20. HM Treasury. The Green Book: a guide to investment appraisal in the public sector. London, 2003
21. Department of Health. Impact assessment of the end of life care strategy. London, 2008. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh- digitalassets/documents/digitalasset/dh-086320.pdf
22. Department of Health. Putting prevention first: vascular checks, risk assessment and management; impact assessment. London, 2008. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/documents/ digitalasset/dh-091696.pdf
23. Department of Health. The NHS Constitution for England. London, 2010. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/@dh/ @en/@ps/documents/digitalasset/dh-113645.pdf (last accessed 5 July 2011)
24. Claxton K, Walker S, Palmer S, Sculpher M. Appropriate perspectives for health care decisions. CHE Research Paper. 54. York, 2010
25. Department of Communities and Local Government. Multi-criteria analysis: a manual. London, 2009. Available at: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/ corporate/pdf/1132618.pdf
26. Department of Health. Improving outcomes: a strategy for cancer. London, 2011. Available at: http://www.dh.gov.uk/prod-consum-dh/groups/dh-digitalassets/ documents/digitalasset/dh-123505.pdf
27. Devlin N, Appleby J, Parkin D. Patients' views of explicit rationing: what are the implications for heath service decision making? J Health Serv Res Policy 2003;8:183-6 (Pubitemid 36850997)