A Practical Guide to Understanding Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.

J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract

Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine and Pediatrics, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Ill.

Published: December 2021

AI Article Synopsis

  • Cost-effectiveness analysis evaluates the value of healthcare interventions by comparing the money spent to the health outcomes achieved, helping stakeholders make informed decisions in resource-limited settings.
  • These analyses rely on accurate data for costs and outcomes, using techniques like Markov chain models to simulate transitions between different health states and conduct sensitivity analyses.
  • While these models provide valuable insights for policy-making in population health, they may miss individual patient details and should be viewed from multiple perspectives, including societal and payer viewpoints.

Article Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis is a way to understand the value of a health care intervention in terms of assessing the money spent to produce beneficial outcomes. Cost-effectiveness analyses are used by various stakeholders for such purposes because health care resources and financing may be scarce, depending on the economy, and certain interventions may be costly to produce such outcomes compared with other options. These analyses are built on well-researched and robust inputs for costs and outcomes and may be modeled using a technique called Markov chain models, which allow transitions among various health states (eg, alive, dead, outgrow allergy, allergy relapses) relative to the condition of interest to reflect a base-case scenario. Then, the margins of the inputs are explored for a sensitivity analysis of potential findings. These analyses should be investigated from multiple perspectives (eg, society, health care payer). Limitations of the analysis should be clearly stated. Although such models are an informative way to explore a situation and can be performed without additional direct patient intervention, a weakness of the approach is that this may overlook individual patient nuances. Cost-effectiveness analyses are important policy tools to show, on average, an optimal way to improve value in population health.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2021.10.006DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

cost-effectiveness analyses
12
health care
12
analyses
5
health
5
practical guide
4
guide understanding
4
cost-effectiveness
4
understanding cost-effectiveness
4
analyses cost-effectiveness
4
cost-effectiveness analysis
4

Similar Publications

Background: Transitional-aged youth have a high burden of mental health difficulties in Canada, with Indigenous youth, in particular, experiencing additional circumstances that challenge their well-being. Mobile health (mHealth) approaches hold promise for supporting individuals in areas with less access to services such as Northern Ontario.

Objective: The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of the JoyPop app in increasing emotion regulation skills for Indigenous transitional-aged youth (aged 18-25 years) on a waitlist for mental health services when compared with usual practice (UP).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: There is indication that the fallopian tubes might be involved in ovarian cancer pathogenesis and their removal reduces cancer risk. Hence, bilateral salpingectomy during hysterectomy or sterilization, so called opportunistic salpingectomy (OS), is gaining wide acceptance as a preventive strategy. Recently, it was discussed whether implementation of OS at other gynecologic surgery, e.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

AimsThe cardioprotective effects of semaglutide 2.4 mg reported in the SELECT cardiovascular (CV) outcomes trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03574597) provide clinical benefit for subjects with overweight or obesity and established CV disease without type 2 diabetes (T2D).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF
Article Synopsis
  • Capivasertib, combined with fulvestrant, shows antitumor activity in hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer, but its cost-effectiveness is uncertain.
  • A partitioned survival model evaluated the treatment's cost-effectiveness, revealing an incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of $709,647 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in the US, indicating it is not cost-effective.
  • Sensitivity analyses confirmed that factors like overall survival rates and the drug's cost greatly influence these results, and findings for China also suggested the treatment is not cost-effective.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Non-proliferative and proliferative diabetic retinopathy are common complications of diabetes and a major cause of sight loss. Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs represent a treatment option for people with diabetic retinopathy and are routinely used to treat various other eye conditions. However, anti-vascular endothelial growth factor drugs are expensive relative to current care options, and it is unclear whether this additional cost is justified when the immediate risk of vision loss is lower compared to patients with more aggressive ophthalmological conditions.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!