Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns

Value in Health

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2017, Pages 206-212

  Cookson, Richard ^a   Mirelman, Andrew J ^a   Griffin, Susan ^a   Asaria, Miqdad ^a   Dawkins, Bryony ^b   Norheim, Ole Frithjof ^c   Verguet, Stéphane ^d   J Culyer, Anthony ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LEEDS   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BERGEN   (Norway)

^d HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

Author keywords

cost effectiveness analysis; delivery of health care; health equity; technology assessment

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DEMOGRAPHY; DISEASE SEVERITY; ETHNICITY; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH CARE DISPARITY; HEALTH CARE DISTRIBUTION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH EQUITY; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEX; SOCIAL STATUS; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; MANAGEMENT; PROCEDURES;

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HEALTH EQUITY; HUMANS; POLICY MAKING; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 85013682335     PISSN: 10983015     EISSN: 15244733     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.027     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. [1] Cotlear, D., Nagpal, S., Smith, O., et al. Going Universal: How 24 Developing Countries are Implementing Universal Health Coverage from the Bottom Up. 2015, World Bank Publications, Washington, DC.
2. [2] Gwatkin, D.R., Ergo, A., Universal health coverage: friend or foe of health equity?. Lancet 377 (2011), 2160–2161.
3. [3] Norheim, O., Ottersen, T., Berhane, F., et al. Making Fair Choices on the Path to Universal Health Coverage: Final Report of the WHO Consultative Group on Equity and Universal Health Coverage. 2014, World Health Organization, Washington, DC.
4. [4] Marmot, M., Friel, S., Bell, R., et al. Closing the gap in a generation: health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Lancet 372 (2008), 1661–1669.
5. [5] Marmot, M., Allen, J., Bell, R., et al. WHO European review of social determinants of health and the health divide. Lancet 380 (2012), 1011–1029.
6. [6] World Health Organization. Tracking Universal Health Coverage: First Global Monitoring Report. 2015, World Health Organization, Washington, DC.
7. [7] World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2000: Health Systems: Improving Performance. 2000, World Health Organization, Washington, DC.
8. [8] Culyer, A.J., Hic sunt dracones: the future of health technology assessment—one economist's perspective. Med Decis Making 32 (2012), E25–E32.
9. [9] Cookson, R., Drummond, M., Weatherly, H., Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions. Health Econ Policy Law 4:Pt 2 (2009), 231–245.
10. [10] Johri, M., Norheim, O., Can cost-effectiveness analysis integrate concerns for equity? Systematic review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 28 (2012), 125–132.
11. [11] Williams, A.H., Cookson, R.A., Equity-efficiency trade-offs in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 22 (2006), 1–9.
12. [12] Daniels, N., Porteny, T., Urritia, J., Expanded HTA: enhancing fairness and legitimacy. Int J Health Policy Manag 5 (2016), 1–3.
13. [13] Verguet, S., Laxminarayan, R., Jamison, D.T., Universal public finance of tuberculosis treatment in India: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 24 (2015), 318–332.
14. [14] Asaria, M., Griffin, S., Cookson, R., Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis: a tutorial. Med Decis Making 36 (2016), 8–19.
15. [15] Brouwer, W.B., Culyer, A.J., van Exel, N.J.A., et al. Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism. J Health Econ 27 (2008), 325–338.
16. [16] Atkinson, A.B., The restoration of welfare economics. Am Econ Rev, 2011, 157–161.
17. [17] Shah, K.K., Cookson, R., Culyer, A.J., Littlejohns, P., NICE׳s social value judgements about equity in health and health care. Health Econ Policy Law 8 (2013), 145–165.
18. [18] Culyer, A.J., HTA–Algorithm or process? Comment on Expanded HTA: enhancing fairness and legitimacy. Int J Health Policy Manag 5 (2016), 501–505.
19. [19] Cookson, R., Justice and the NICE approach. J Med Ethics 41 (2015), 99–102.
20. [20] Culyer, A.J., The bogus conflict between efficiency and vertical equity. Health Econ 15 (2006), 1155–1158.
21. [21] Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M., Claxton, K., et al. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes, 4th ed., 2015, Oxford University Press, Oxford, United Kingdom.
22. [22] Norheim, O.F., Atkinson's index applied to health: can measures of economic inequality help us understand trade-offs in health care priority setting. Eyal, N., Hurst, S.A., Norheim, O.F., (eds.) Inequalities in Health, 2014, Oxford Scholarship Online, Oxford, United Kingdom.
23. [23] Asaria, M., Griffin, S., Cookson, R., Measuring health inequality in the context of cost-effectiveness analysis. Bishop, J., (eds.) Health and Inequality. Vol. 21. (Research on Economic Inequality, Volume 21)., 2013, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, United Kingdom, 491–507.
24. [24] Kjellsson, G., Gerdtham, U.G., Petrie, D., Lies, damned lies, and health inequality measurements: understanding the value judgments. Epidemiology 26 (2015), 673–680.
25. [25] Asada, Y., Hurley, J., Norheim, O., Johri, M., Unexplained health inequality - is it unfair?. Int J Equity Health, 14, 2015, 11.
26. [26] Cookson, R., QALYs and the capability approach. Health Econ 14 (2005), 817–829.
27. [27] Asante, A., Price, J., Hayen, A., et al. Equity in health care financing in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of evidence from studies using benefit and financing incidence analyses. PLoS One, 11, 2016, e0152866.
28. [28] Verguet, S., Murphy, S., Anderson, B., et al. Public finance of rotavirus vaccination in India and Ethiopia: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Vaccine 31 (2013), 4902–4910.
29. [29] Lorenc, T., Petticrew, M., Welch, V., Tugwell, P., What types of interventions generate inequalities? Evidence from systematic reviews. J Epidemiol Community Health 67 (2013), 190–193.
30. [30] McLaren, L., McIntyre, L., Kirkpatrick, S., Rose׳s population strategy of prevention need not increase social inequalities in health. Int J Epidemiol 39 (2010), 372–377.
31. [31] Frohlich, K.L., Potvin, L., Transcending the known in public health practice: the inequality paradox: the population approach and vulnerable populations. Am J Public Health 98 (2008), 216–221.
32. [32] Kypridemos, C., Allen, K., Hickey, G.L., et al. Cardiovascular screening to reduce the burden from cardiovascular disease: microsimulation study to quantify policy options. BMJ, 353, 2016, i2793.
33. [33] Allen, K., Pearson-Stuttard, J., Hooton, W., et al. Potential of trans fats policies to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in mortality from coronary heart disease in England: cost effectiveness modelling study. BMJ, 351, 2015, h4583.
34. [34] Norheim, O.F., Gini impact analysis: measuring pure health inequity before and after interventions. Public Health Ethics 3 (2010), 282–292.
35. [35] Meier, P.S., Holmes, J., Angus, C., et al. Estimated effects of different alcohol taxation and price policies on health inequalities: a mathematical modelling study. PLoS Med, 13, 2016, e1001963.
36. [36] Verguet, S., Kim, J.J., Jamison, D.T., Extended cost-effectiveness analysis for health policy assessment: a tutorial. Pharmacoeconomics 34 (2016), 913–923.
37. [37] Murray, C.J., Frenk, J., A framework for assessing the performance of health systems. Bull World Health Organ 78 (2000), 717–731.
38. [38] Verguet, S., Gauvreau, C.L., Mishra, S., et al. The consequences of tobacco tax on household health and finances in rich and poor smokers in China: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet Glob Health 3 (2015), e206–e216.
39. [39] Verguet S, Jamison DT. Applications of extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) methodology in DCP3. In: Jamison DT, Gelband H, Horton S, et al., eds., Disease Control Priorities. Vol 9. Washington, DC: World Bank, forthcoming.
40. [40] Asaria, M., Griffin, S., Cookson, R., et al. Distributional cost-effectiveness analysis of health care programmes—a methodological case study of the UK Bowel Cancer Screening Programme. Health Econ 24 (2015), 742–754.
41. [41] Morton, A., Aversion to health inequalities in healthcare prioritisation: A multicriteria optimisation perspective. J Health Econ 36 (2014), 164–173.
42. [42] Cookson, R.A., Propper, C., Asaria, M., Raine, R., Socioeconomic inequalities in health care in England. Fiscal Studies 37 (2016), 371–403.
43. [43] Bajekal, M., Scholes, S., Love, H., et al. Analysing recent socioeconomic trends in coronary heart disease mortality in England, 2000-2007: a population modelling study. PLoS Med, 9, 2012, 12.
44. [44] Kruse, I., Pradhan, M., Sparrow, R., Marginal benefit incidence of public health spending: Evidence from Indonesian sub-national data. J Health Econ 31 (2012), 147–157.
45. [45] Cleary, S., Mooney, G., McIntyre, D., Equity and efficiency in HIV-treatment in South Africa: the contribution of mathematical programming to priority setting. Health Econ 19 (2010), 1166–1180.
46. [46] Fink, G., Dickens, W.T., Jordan, M., Cohen, J.L., Access to subsidized ACT and malaria treatment—evidence from the first year of the AMFm program in six districts in Uganda. Health Policy Plan 4 (2014), 517–527.
47. [47] Epstein, D.M., Chalabi, Z., Claxton, K., Sculpher, M., Efficiency, equity, and budgetary policies informing decisions using mathematical programming. Med Decis Making 27 (2007), 128–137.
48. [48] Wailoo, A., Tsuchiya, A., McCabe, C., Weighting must wait. Pharmacoeconomics 27 (2009), 983–989.
49. [49] Cookson, R., Griffin, S., Nord, E., Incorporation of concerns for fairness in economic evaluation of health programs: overview. Culyer, A.J., (eds.) Encyclopedia of Health Economics, Vol 2, 2014, Elsevier, San Diego, 27–34.
50. [50] Nord, E., The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. Health Policy 24 (1993), 227–238.
51. [51] Williams, A., Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the ׳fair innings׳ argument. Health Econ 6 (1997), 117–132.
52. [52] Ottersen, T., Mæstad, O., Norheim, O.F., Lifetime QALY prioritarianism in priority setting: quantification of the inherent trade-off. Cost Eff Resour Alloc, 12, 2014, 2.
53. [53] Ottersen, T., Forde, R., Kakad, M., et al. A new proposal for priority setting in Norway: open and fair. Health Policy 120 (2016), 246–251.
54. [54] Lindemark, F., Norheim, O.F., Johansson, K.A., Making use of equity sensitive QALYs: a case study on identifying the worse off across diseases. Cost Eff Resour Alloc, 12, 2014, 16.
55. [55] Rowen, D., Brazier, J., Mukuria, C., et al. Eliciting societal preferences for weighting QALYs for burden of illness and end of life. Med Decis Making 36 (2016), 210–222.
56. [56] Wagstaff, Adam. “QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off.” Journal of Health Economics 10.1 (1991): 21-41.
57. [57] Baltussen, R., Niessen, L., Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc, 4, 2006, 14.
58. [58] Thokala, P., Devlin, N., Marsh, K., et al. Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making 2014; an introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 19 (2016), 1–13.
59. [59] Williams, Alan. (1997). “Intergenerational equity: an exploration of the'fair innings' argument.” Health Economics 6(2): 117-132.
60. [60] Norheim, O., Baltussen, R., Johri, M., et al. Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc, 12, 2014, 18.
61. [61] Culyer, A.J., Bombard, Y., An equity framework for health technology assessments. Med Decis Making 32 (2012), 428–441.
62. [62] Claxton, K., Martin, S., Soares, M., et al. Methods for the estimation of the NICE cost effectiveness threshold. 2013, University of York, York, United Kingdom.
63. [63] Sassi, F., Archard, L., Le Grand, J., Equity and the economic evaluation of healthcare. Health Technol Assess 5 (2001), 1–138.
64. [64] Van de Wetering, E., Stolk, E., Van Exel, N., Brouwer, W., Balancing equity and efficiency in the Dutch basic benefits package using the principle of proportional shortfall. Eur J Health Econ 14 (2013), 107–115.
65. [65] Cookson, R., Can the NICE “end-of-life premium” be given a coherent ethical justification?. J Health Polit Policy Law 38 (2013), 1129–1148.
66. [66] Cookson, R., Equity-informative health technology assessment – A commentary on Ngalesoni, Ruhago, Mori, Robberstad & Norheim. Soc Sci Med 170 (2016), 218–219.