Cost-effectiveness and Resource Allocation—Reply

Anthony Harris, Suzanne R. Hill, David A. Henry

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearch

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

[Extract] In Reply: Decisions on health care resource allocation, made with incomplete information, will always be imperfect. When faced with a fixed health budget and a goal of maximizing population health, as measured by an index such as the QALY, the optimal rule is to rank all independent health interventions in descending order of efficiency determined by dollar per QALY gained and then run down the list funding interventions until running out of money.1 At that point the last intervention funded would have a threshold ICER that reflected our willingness to pay for an extra QALY for a given budget. In cases in which budgets are small (as in low-income countries), the threshold ICER will have to be much lower than in high-income countries; this is the basis of proposals for differential pricing of essential medicines, which attempts to equalize opportunity costs in different settings.2 In cases in which a new drug is likely to have a major impact on the total budget (and perhaps displace interventions that have a low cost per QALY), we should use a higher threshold value. So the cost-effectiveness threshold, budgets, and affordability are always linked.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)2723-2724
Number of pages2
JournalJournal of the American Medical Association
Volume295
Issue number23
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 21 Jun 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Budgets
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health
Resource Allocation
Health Resources
Delivery of Health Care
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Population

Cite this

Harris, Anthony ; Hill, Suzanne R. ; Henry, David A. / Cost-effectiveness and Resource Allocation—Reply. In: Journal of the American Medical Association. 2006 ; Vol. 295, No. 23. pp. 2723-2724.
@article{a06d0b40153944f6af6c1b1d8fafa15d,
title = "Cost-effectiveness and Resource Allocation—Reply",
abstract = "[Extract] In Reply: Decisions on health care resource allocation, made with incomplete information, will always be imperfect. When faced with a fixed health budget and a goal of maximizing population health, as measured by an index such as the QALY, the optimal rule is to rank all independent health interventions in descending order of efficiency determined by dollar per QALY gained and then run down the list funding interventions until running out of money.1 At that point the last intervention funded would have a threshold ICER that reflected our willingness to pay for an extra QALY for a given budget. In cases in which budgets are small (as in low-income countries), the threshold ICER will have to be much lower than in high-income countries; this is the basis of proposals for differential pricing of essential medicines, which attempts to equalize opportunity costs in different settings.2 In cases in which a new drug is likely to have a major impact on the total budget (and perhaps displace interventions that have a low cost per QALY), we should use a higher threshold value. So the cost-effectiveness threshold, budgets, and affordability are always linked.",
author = "Anthony Harris and Hill, {Suzanne R.} and Henry, {David A.}",
year = "2006",
month = "6",
day = "21",
doi = "10.1001/jama.295.23.2723-b",
language = "English",
volume = "295",
pages = "2723--2724",
journal = "Journal of the American Medical Association",
issn = "0098-7484",
publisher = "AMER MEDICAL ASSOC",
number = "23",

}

Cost-effectiveness and Resource Allocation—Reply. / Harris, Anthony; Hill, Suzanne R.; Henry, David A.

In: Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 295, No. 23, 21.06.2006, p. 2723-2724.

Research output: Contribution to journalLetterResearch

TY - JOUR

T1 - Cost-effectiveness and Resource Allocation—Reply

AU - Harris, Anthony

AU - Hill, Suzanne R.

AU - Henry, David A.

PY - 2006/6/21

Y1 - 2006/6/21

N2 - [Extract] In Reply: Decisions on health care resource allocation, made with incomplete information, will always be imperfect. When faced with a fixed health budget and a goal of maximizing population health, as measured by an index such as the QALY, the optimal rule is to rank all independent health interventions in descending order of efficiency determined by dollar per QALY gained and then run down the list funding interventions until running out of money.1 At that point the last intervention funded would have a threshold ICER that reflected our willingness to pay for an extra QALY for a given budget. In cases in which budgets are small (as in low-income countries), the threshold ICER will have to be much lower than in high-income countries; this is the basis of proposals for differential pricing of essential medicines, which attempts to equalize opportunity costs in different settings.2 In cases in which a new drug is likely to have a major impact on the total budget (and perhaps displace interventions that have a low cost per QALY), we should use a higher threshold value. So the cost-effectiveness threshold, budgets, and affordability are always linked.

AB - [Extract] In Reply: Decisions on health care resource allocation, made with incomplete information, will always be imperfect. When faced with a fixed health budget and a goal of maximizing population health, as measured by an index such as the QALY, the optimal rule is to rank all independent health interventions in descending order of efficiency determined by dollar per QALY gained and then run down the list funding interventions until running out of money.1 At that point the last intervention funded would have a threshold ICER that reflected our willingness to pay for an extra QALY for a given budget. In cases in which budgets are small (as in low-income countries), the threshold ICER will have to be much lower than in high-income countries; this is the basis of proposals for differential pricing of essential medicines, which attempts to equalize opportunity costs in different settings.2 In cases in which a new drug is likely to have a major impact on the total budget (and perhaps displace interventions that have a low cost per QALY), we should use a higher threshold value. So the cost-effectiveness threshold, budgets, and affordability are always linked.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33745228472&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1001/jama.295.23.2723-b

DO - 10.1001/jama.295.23.2723-b

M3 - Letter

VL - 295

SP - 2723

EP - 2724

JO - Journal of the American Medical Association

JF - Journal of the American Medical Association

SN - 0098-7484

IS - 23

ER -