Summary
With the growing international literature in economic evaluation and the rapid international spread of health technologies, there is a need to undertake, or at least interpret, economic evaluations at an international level.
The pharmaceutical industry is used to gathering data on the efficacy and safety of its products. Here the prior assumption is that the performance of a medicine is largely unaffected by differences between settings. Cost-effectiveness data for medicines may not be so easily transferable, however. They may be affected by differences in the availability of alternative treatments, in clinical practice patterns, in relative prices and in the incentives to healthcare professionals and institutions. One jurisdiction where cost-effectiveness data are required formally, Australia, has pointed out that data need to be relevant to local circumstances.
This paper examines these issues, with particular reference to the treatment of acid-related diseases. The reasons why cost-effectiveness data may vary by setting are examined in depth, the published literature is reviewed to assess the comparative cost-effectiveness of products across countries, and some recommendations are made about the conducting and interpretation of economic studies on the international level.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ashton T. Cost-effectiveness of alternative medications in the treatment of duodenal ulcer. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 26: 82–88, 1991
Bamberg P, Caswell CM, Frame MH, Lorn SK, Wong ECK. A meta-analysis comparing the efficacy of omeprazole with H2-receptor antagonists for acute treatment of duodenal ulcer in Asian patients. Journal of Gastroenterology and Hepatology 7: 577–585, 1992
Bate CM. Cost-effectiveness of omeprazole in the treatment of reflux oesophagitis. British Journal of Medical Economics 1: 53–61, 1991
Bate CM, Richardson PDI. Cost-effectiveness of 20mg and 40mg of omeprazole in oesophageal reflux disease. British Journal of Medical Economics 6: 59–66, 1993
Bell GD, Powell KU, Bolton G, Richardson PDI. Clinical and pharmacoeconomic evaluation of management strategies for duodenal ulcer disease. British Journal of Medical Economics 6: 45–58, 1993
Commonwealth of Australia. Guidelines for submissions to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee, including economic analyses. Woden, Canberra, ACT, 1992
Drummond MF, Bloom BS, Carrin G, Hillman AL, Hutchings HC, et al. Issues in the cross-national assessment of health technology. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Healthcare 8: 671–682, 1992
Drummond MF, Brandt A, Luce B, Rovira J. Standardizing methodologies for economic evaluation in healthcare: practice, problems, potential. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Healthcare 9: 26–36, 1993
Edelson JT, Tosteson ANA, Sax P. Cost-effectiveness of misoprostol for prophylaxis against nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug-induced gastrointestinal tract bleeding. Journal of the American Medical Association 264: 41–47, 1990
Finkler SA. On the distinction between costs and charges. Annals of Internal Medicine 96: 102–109, 1982
Hawkes RA, Drummond MF. Cost-effective options for fund-holding GPs. Prescriber: 77–82, 1993
Hillman AL, Bloom BS. Economic effects of prophylactic use of misoprostol to prevent gastric ulcer in patients taking nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Archives of Internal Medicine 149: 2061–2065, 1989
Hillman AL, Bloom BS, Fendrick AM, Schwartz JS. Cost and quality effects of alternative treatments for persistent gastroesophageal reflux disease. Archives of Internal Medicine 152: 1467–1472, 1992
Jönsson B. A review of the macroeconomic evaluation of cimet-idine. In Culyer & Horisberger (Eds) Economic and medical evaluation of healthcare technologies, pp. 243–261, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983
Jönsson B. Economic evaluation of a new medical technology. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 29 (Suppl. 201): 87–90, 1994
Jönsson B, Drummond MF, Stalhammer N-O. Cost-effectiveness of omeprazole and ranitidine in the treatment of duodenal ulcer. PharmacoEconomics 5 (Suppl. 3): 44–55, 1994
Lindberg G. Omeprazole vs ranitidine in reflux oesophagitis in Sweden. PharmacoEconomics 5 (Suppl. 3): 27–34, 1994
Lindberg G, Jönsson B. Omeprazol mer kastnads — effektivt an ranitidine vid refluxesofagit. Lakartidningen 89: 2530–2533, 1992
McTavish D, Buckley MM-T, Heel RC. Omeprazole. An updated review of its pharmacology and therapeutic use in acid-related disorders. Drugs 42: 138–170, 1991
Mulder CJJ, Schipper DL. Omeprazole and ranitidine in duodenal ulcer healing. Analysis of comparative clinical trials. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 25 (Suppl. 178): 62–66, 1990
Sintonen J, Alander V. Comparing cost-effectiveness of drug regimens in the treatment of duodenal ulcers. Journal of Health Economics 9: 85–101, 1990
Walan A, Eriksson S. Long-term consequences with regard to clinical outcome and cost-effectiveness of episodic treatment with omeprazole and ranitidine for healing of duodenal ulcer. Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology 29 (Suppl. 201): 91–97, 1994
Weisbrod BA. Economic approaches to evaluating a new medical technology: the drug cimetidine. In Culyer & Horisberger (Eds) Economic and medical evaluation of healthcare technologies, pp. 188–205, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1983
Wells NEJ. Regulation of the pharmaceutical industry: and now pharmacoeconomics research? PharmacoEconomics 2: 435–439, 1992
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Drummond, M.F. Comparing Cost-Effectiveness Across Countries. Pharmacoeconomics 5 (Suppl 3), 60–67 (1994). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199400053-00010
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-199400053-00010