How do Economic Evaluations Inform Health Policy Decisions for Treatment and Prevention in Canada and the United States?

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy

Volumn 13, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 273-279

  Husereau, Don ^a,b   Culyer, Anthony J ^c,d   Neumann, Peter ^e   Jacobs, Philip ^a  

^a INSTITUTE OF HEALTH ECONOMICS   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^d UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^e TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CANADA; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; EDITORIAL; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH ECONOMIST; HUMAN; IMMUNIZATION; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; MEDICARE; NAMED GROUPS BY OCCUPATION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; UNITED STATES; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DRUG THERAPY; ECONOMICS; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; MANAGEMENT; PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; PROCEDURES; THERAPY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

CANADA; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; DRUG THERAPY; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; IMMUNIZATION; POLICY MAKING; PREVENTIVE MEDICINE; THERAPEUTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84937419252     PISSN: 11755652     EISSN: 11791896     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s40258-014-0133-6     Document Type: Editorial

References (54)

1. Reamy J. Health care in Canada: lessons for the United States. J Rural Health. 1991;7(3):210–21.
2. Naylor CD. The Canadian health care system: a model for American to emulate? Health Econ. 1992;1(1):19–37.
3. Globerman S, Hodges H, Vining A. Canadian and the United States’ health care systems performance and governance: elements of convergence. Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2002;1(2):75–88.
4. Boyle T. Dr. Danielle Martin explains the virtues of our single-payer system before a U.S. Senate subcommittee. The Toronto Star [Internet]. 2014. Available from: http://www.thestar.com/life/health_wellness/2014/03/13/toronto_doctor_smacks_down_us_senators_myths_about_canadian_health_care.html. Cited 25 Jun 2014.
5. CDC-VFC About the Program—Vaccines for Children Program—Vaccines [Internet]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/vfc/about/. Cited 24 Jun 2014.
6. Hinman AR, Orenstein WA, Rodewald L. Financing immunizations in the United States. Clin Infect Dis. 2004;38(10):1440–6.
7. Luce BR. Pharmacoeconomics and managed care: methodologic and policy issues. Med Decis Mak. 1998;18(2 Suppl):S4–11.
8. Elixhauser A, Halpern M, Schmier J, Luce BR. Health care CBA and CEA from 1991 to 1996: an updated bibliography. Med Care. 1998;36(5 Suppl):MS1–9, MS18–147.
9. Canadian Institute for Health Information. National Health Expenditure Trends, 1975 to 2013 [Internet]. Ottawa: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2013. Available from: https://secure.cihi.ca/estore/productFamily.htm?locale=en&pf=PFC2400&lang=en2. Cited 1 Mar 2013.
10. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry [Internet]. Available from: https://research.tufts-nemc.org/cear4/Home.aspx. Cited 6 Jul 2014.
11. Chambers JD, Neumann PJ, Buxton MJ. Does medicare have an implicit cost-effectiveness threshold? Med Decis Mak. 2010;30(4):E14–27.
12. Morgan S, Barer M, Evans R. Health economists meet the fourth tempter: drug dependency and scientific discourse. Health Econ. 2000;9(8):659–67.
13. Gerard K, Mooney G. QALY league tables: handle with care. Health Econ. 1993;2(1):59–64.
14. Leff B, Finucane TE. Gizmo idolatry. JAMA. 2008;299(15):1830–2.
15. Rocchi A, Miller E, Hopkins RB, Goeree R. Common drug review recommendations: an evidence base for expectations? Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30(3):229–46.
16. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ. 1992;146(4):473–81.
17. Clement FM, Harris A, Li JJ, et al. Using effectiveness and cost-effectiveness to make drug coverage decisions: a comparison of Britain, Australia, and Canada. JAMA. 2009;302(13):1437–43.
18. Chabot I, Rocchi A. How do cost-effectiveness analyses inform reimbursement decisions for oncology medicines in Canada? The example of sunitinib for first-line treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Value Health. 2010;13(6):837–45.
19. Paulden M, O’Mahony JF, Culyer AJ, McCabe C. Some inconsistencies in NICE’s consideration of social values. Pharmacoeconomics. 2014;22:1–11.
20. EMD Serono Specialty Digest, 10th ed [Internet]. 2014. Available from: http://specialtydigest.emdserono.com/Archives.aspx. Cited 24 Jun 2014.
21. Chambers JD, Morris S, Neumann PJ, Buxton MJ. Factors predicting medicare national coverage: an empirical analysis. Med Care. 2012;50(3):249–56.
22. Neumann PJ, Lin P-J, Greenberg D, Berger M, Teutsch S, Mansley E, et al. Do drug formulary policies reflect evidence of value? Am J Manag Care. 2006;12(1):30–6.
23. Duclos P. National Immunization Technical Advisory Groups (NITAGs): guidance for their establishment and strengthening. Vaccine. 2010;19(28 Suppl 1):A18–25.
24. WHO | Global Immunization Vision and Strategy [Internet]. WHO. Available from: http://www.who.int/immunization/givs/en/. Cited 19 Feb 2014.
25. Walker DG, Hutubessy R, Beutels P. WHO Guide for standardisation of economic evaluations of immunization programmes. Vaccine. 2010;28(11):2356–9.
26. Jacobs P. Are economic evaluations an important tool in vaccine policy decisions? Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11(5):507–11.
27. Smith JC. The structure, role, and procedures of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Vaccine. 2010;28:A68–75.
28. Ismail SJ, Langley JM, Harris TM, Warshawsky BF, Desai S, FarhangMehr M. Canada’s National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI): evidence-based decision-making on vaccines and immunization. Vaccine. 2010;19(28 Suppl 1):A58–63.
29. Government of Canada PHA of C. National Immunization Strategy (NIS)—Public Health Agency of Canada [Internet]. 2010. Available from: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/im/nis-sni/index-eng.php. Cited 19 Feb 2014.
30. Erickson LJ, De Wals P, Farand L. An analytical framework for immunization programs in Canada. Vaccine. 2005;23(19):2470–6.
31. Government of Canada PHA of C. National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI)—Immunization & Vaccines—Public Health Agency of Canada [Internet]. 2012. Available from: http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/naci-ccni/sum-res/feb-fev-2011-eng.php. Cited 19 Feb 2014.
32. Scheifele DW, Ward BJ, Halperin SA, McNeil SA, Crowcroft NS, Bjornson G. Approved but non-funded vaccines: accessing individual protection. Vaccine. 2014;32(7):766–70.
33. MacDonald NE, Bortolussi R. A harmonized immunization schedule for Canada: a call to action. Paediatr Child Health. 2011;16(1):29.
34. Langley J, Krahn MD, Husereau DR, Spika J, Fisman D, Chit A, et al. Incorporating economic evaluation into immunization decision making in Canada, a workshop. Expert Rev Vaccines. 2014:1-6.
35. Pizzi L. Economic evaluation in U.S. health care: principles and applications. Jones & Bartlett Learning, Burlington; 2006. 203 p.
36. Kim JJ. The role of cost-effectiveness in U.S. Vaccination policy. N Engl J Med. 2011;365(19):1760–1.
37. Dempsey AF, Cowan AE, Stokley S, Messonnier M, Clark SJ, Davis MM. The role of economic information in decision-making by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices. Vaccine. 2008;26(42):5389–92.
38. Ahmed F, Temte JL, Campos-Outcalt D, Schünemann HJ, ACIP Evidence Based Recommendations Work Group (EBRWG). Methods for developing evidence-based recommendations by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Vaccine. 2011;29(49):9171–6.
39. CDC-ACIP—guidance for health economics studies presented to the ACIP—vaccines [Internet]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/committee/guidance/economic-studies.html. Cited 25 Jun 2014.
40. United States. Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. The implications of cost-effectiveness analysis of medical technology [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: Congress of the United States, Office of Technology Assessment: For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. G.P.O.; 1980. 238 p. Available from: http://archive.org/details/implicationsofco00unit_2. Cited 22 Jun 2014.
41. Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med. 1977;296(13):716–21.
42. Drummond MF. Principles of economic appraisal in health care. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1980. 148 p.
43. Culyer AJ. The normative economics of health care finance and provision. Oxf Rev Econ Policy. 1989;5(1):34–58.
44. Cochrane AL. Effectiveness & efficiency: random reflections on health services. London: CRC Press; 1999.
45. Feinstein AR. Clinical epidemiology I. The populational experiments of nature and of man in human illness. Ann Intern Med. 1968;69(4):807–20.
46. Sackett DL. Clinical epidemiology. Am J Epidemiol. 1969;89(2):125–8.
47. Guyatt G, Drummond M, Feeny D, Tugwell P, Stoddart G, Haynes RB, et al. Guidelines for the clinical and economic evaluation of health care technologies. Soc Sci Med. 1986;22(4):393–408.
48. Torrance GW, Thomas WH, Sackett DL. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res. 1972;7(2):118–33.
49. Zeckhauser R, Shepard D. Where now for saving lives? Law Contemp Probl. 1976;40(4):5–45.
50. Williams I, Bryan S. Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health care resource allocation: a conceptual framework. Health Policy. 2007;80(1):135–43.
51. Neumann PJ. American exceptionalism and American health care: Implications for the U.S. debate on cost-effectiveness analysis. [Internet]. Office of Health Economics; 2009. Available from: http://www.ohe.org/publications/article/american-exceptionalism-and-american-health-care-31.cfm.
52. PausJenssen AM, Singer PA, Detsky AS. Ontario’s formulary committee: how recommendations are made. Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(4):285–94.
53. Williams A. Health economics: the end of clinical freedom? BMJ. 1988;297(6657):1183–6.
54. Elhauge E. The limited regulatory potential of medical technology assessment. Va Law Rev. 1996;82(8):1525–622.