Abstract
Rising health care costs are of concern to policymakers, employers, health care leaders, patients, and citizens all over the world. Health care decision makers struggle to satisfy the increasing demands for health care services associated with aging populations, increasing health care technologies, and changing population expectations using the resources available to the health care system. Notwithstanding, improvements in the level of health of the populations and increasing productivity of health care providers, there appears to be a continuous call for health care systems to do more and to do better. The economics discipline has been identified as providing relevant “toolbox” for dealing with these challenges and there is now over a quarter century of experience of applying an economics way of thinking as an input to health care decision processes. Until recently, this application occurred in an opportunistic, or at least nonsystematic way, within health care systems. In recent years there have been movements in both academic and policymaking environments to promote more systematic and standardized approaches to the use of economics as an input to decision making about the investment in health care programs.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Culyer AJ. Economics and Health Economics. In: VanderGang J, Perlman M, eds. Health, Economics, and Health Economics. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1981, pp 3–11.
Williams A. The economic role of health indicators. In: Teeling SG, ed. Measuring the Social Benefit of Medicine. Office of Health Economics, London, 1983, pp. 63–67.
Drummond M, Stoddart G, Torrance G. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1987.
Birch S, Gafni A. On being NICE in the UK: guidelines for technology appraisal for the NHS in England and Wales. Health Econ. 2002;11:185–191.
Gafni A, Birch S. Equity considerations in utility-based measures of health outcomes in economic appraisals: an adjustment algorithm. J Health Econ 1991;10:329–342.
LeGrand J. Equity and Choice: An Essay in Economics and Applied Philosophy. Harper Collins, London, 1991.
Mooney G. Economics, Medicine, and Health Care. Wheatsheaf, Brighton, 1986.
Weinstein MC, Stason WB. Foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis for health and medical practices. N Engl J Med 1977;296:716–721.
Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine. Oxford University Press, New York, 1996.
Drummond M, O’Brien B, Stoddart G, Torrance G. Methods for the Economic Evaluations of Health Care Programmes. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Riluzole for Motor Neurone Disease-Full Guidance. London, 2001.
National Institute for Clinical Excellence, Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal (reference N0515). National Institute of Clinical Excellence, London. Available at http://www.nice.org.uk/pdf/brdnov03item3b-pdf. Accessed 2004.
Naylor D. Cost-effectiveness analysis: are the outputs worth the inputs? ACP J Club 1996;124:A12–14.
Coast J. Is economic evaluation in touch with society’s health values? BMJ 2004;329:1233–1236.
Williams A. What Could Be Nicer Than NICE? Office of Health Economics, London, 2004.
Wagstaff A. QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off. J Health Econ 1991;10:21–41.
Gafni A. Proper preference-based outcome measures in economic evaluations of pharmaceutical interventions. Med Care 1996;34:DS48–DS58.
Gafni A, Birch S. Preferences for outcomes in economic evaluation: an economic approach to addressing economic problems. Soc Sci Med 1995;40:767–776.
Pliskin JS, Shepard DS, Winstein MC. Utility functions for life year and health status. Oper Res 1980;28:206–224.
Vijan S, Hofer TP, Hayward, RA. Cost-utility analysis of screening intervals for diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. JAMA 2000;283:889–896.
CDC Diabetes Cost Effectiveness Group. Cost-effectiveness of intensive glycemic control, intensified hypertension control, and serum cholesterol level reduction for type 2 diabetes. JAMA 2002;287:2542–2551.
Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Within-trial cost-effectiveness of lifestyle intervention or metformin for the primary prevention of type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2003;26:2518–2523.
Arnesen T, Trommald M. Roughly right or precisely wrong? Systematic review of quality-of-life weights elicited with the time trade-off method. J Health Serv Res Policy 2004;9:43–50.
Ried W. QALYs versus HYEs: what’s right and what’s wrong. A review of the controversy. J Health Econ 1998;17:607–625.
Cookson R, McDaid D, Maynard A. Wrong SIGN, NICE mess: is national guidance distorting allocation of resources? BMJ 2001;323:743–745.
Devlin N. An introduction to the use of cost-effectiveness thresholds in decision making: what are the issues? In: Towse A, Pritchard C, Devlin N, eds. Cost Effectiveness Thresholds: Economics and Ethical Issues. Kings Fund and Office of Health Economics, London, 2002, pp. 16–21.
Gafni A and Birch S. NICE methodological guidelines and decision making in the National Health Service in England and Wales. Pharmacoeconomics 2003;21:149–157.
Weinstein M, Zeckhauser R. Critical ratios and efficient allocation. J Public Econ 1973;2:147–157.
Birch S, Gafni A. Cost effectiveness/utility analyses. Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be? J Health Econ 1992;11:279–296.
Birch S, Gafni A. Changing the problem to fit the solution: Johannesson and Weinstein’s (mis) application of economics to real world problems. J Health Econ 1993;12:469–476.
Sendi P, Gafni A, Birch S. Opportunity costs and uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care interventions. Health Econ 2002;11:23–31.
Devlin N, Parkin D, Gold M. WHO evaluates NICE. BMJ 2003;327:1061–1062.
Ubel PA, Hirth RA, Chernew ME, Fendrick AM. What is the price of life and why doesn’t it increase at the rate of inflation? Arch Intern Med 2003;163:1637–1641.
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;146:473–581.
Laupacis A. Inclusion of drugs in provincial drug benefit programs: who is making these decisions, and are they the right ones? CMAJ 2002;166:44–47.
Gafni A, Birch S. Inclusion of drugs in provincial drug benefit programs: Should “reasonable decisions” lead to uncontrolled growth in expenditures? CMAJ 2003;168:849–851.
Winkelmayer WC, Weinstein MC, Mittleman MA, Glynn RJ, Pliskin JS. Health economic evaluations: the special case of end-stage renal disease treatment. Med Decis Making 2002;22:417–430.
King JT, Jr., Justice AC, Aron DC. Management of incidental pituitary microadenomas: a costeffectiveness analysis. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1997;82:3625–3632.
Gafni A, Birch S. Guidelines for the adoption of new technologies: a prescription for uncontrolled growth in expenditures and how to avoid the problem. CMAJ 1993;148:913–97.
Gafni A. Economic evaluation of health care interventions: an economist’s perspective. ACP J Club 1996;124:A12–A14.
Maynard A, Sheldon T. Health economics: has it fulfilled its promise? In: Maynard A, Chalmers I, eds. Non-random Reflection on Health Services Research. BMJ Press, London, 1977.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gafni, A. (2006). Clouded Thinking. In: Montori, V.M. (eds) Evidence-Based Endocrinology. Contemporary Endocrinology. Humana Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-008-9_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59745-008-9_15
Publisher Name: Humana Press
Print ISBN: 978-1-58829-579-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-59745-008-9
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)