Abstract
No common definitions exist for how to think or talk about value. Different perspectives, situations, needs, and goals all influence what value may mean and to whom. This inconsistency leaves healthcare professionals to use their best judgment for how to assess value or to apply rigid tools that may not be appropriate for their unique situation. Additionally, inconsistent motivations for assessing value exist; patients, providers, policy makers, and third-party healthcare organizations all seek to assess value for different purposes and to inform different decisions. Without consistency in the language and methods of value assessment the industry as a whole will continue to struggle to agree on what constitutes value or how to increase it.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
The details of how to apply quality adjustments to life years are not important here, but we can employ various methods to attempt to establish the appropriate quality adjustment.
- 2.
I am describing the general methodology of cost–utility analysis, which we will cover in a later chapter; this calculation is called the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).
References
Lakdawalla DN, Romley JA, Sanchez Y, Maclean JR, Penrod JR, Philipson T (2012) How cancer patients value hope and the implications for cost-effectiveness assessments of high-cost cancer therapies. Health Aff 31(4):676–682. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2011.1300
Eisler R (2007) The real wealth of nations: creating a caring economy. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Oakland
Leatherman S, Berwick D, Iles D, Lewin LS, Davidoff F, Nolan T, Bisognano M (2003) The business case for quality: case studies and an analysis. Health Aff 22(2):17–30. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.22.2.17
Lakdawalla DN, Doshi JA, Garrison LP Jr, Phelps CE, Basu A, Danzon PM (2018) Defining elements of value in health care-a health economics approach: an ISPOR special task force report [3]. Value Health 21(2):131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jval.2017.12.007
Partanen A (2016) The Nordic theory of everything. In: Search of a better life. Harper, New York
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Solid, C.A. (2022). Challenge 3: Inconsistency. In: Practical Strategies to Assess Value in Health Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95149-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95149-8_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-95148-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-95149-8
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)