Including Both Costs and Effects – The Challenge of Using Cost-Effectiveness Data in National-Level Policy-Making: A Response to Recent Commentaries

Document Type : Correspondence

Authors

1 Division of Health Care Analysis, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

2 Department of Cardiology and Department of Medicine and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

3 Division of Health Care Analysis, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden

Keywords

Main Subjects

Full Text

Incorporating cost-effectiveness data in the priority-setting decisions is a distinguishing feature in the Swedish national guidelines. This differentiates the Swedish guidelines from its European and American counterparts. The broader perspective is aimed at facilitating explicit resource allocations and priority-setting in healthcare, all in accordance with the three guiding ethical principles stated in the Health and Medical Services Act.1... (Read more...)

References

  1. Health and Medical Service Act, SFS 1982:763 (1982).
  2. Eckard N, Janzon M, Levin LA. Use of cost-effectiveness data in priority setting decisions: experiences from the national guidelines for heart diseases in Sweden. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2014;3(6):323-332.       doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2014.105
  3. Williams I, Bryan S. Lonely at the top and stuck in the middle? The ongoing challenge of using cost-effectiveness information in priority setting. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2014;4(3):185-187. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.32
  4. Erntoft S. The use (or rather non-use) of cost-effectiveness data in priority setting decisions – are we underestimating the barriers to using health economics in real world priority setting decisions? Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015;4(3):181-183. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.28
  5. Williams I. Institutions, cost-effectiveness analysis and health care rationing: the example of health care coverage in the English National Health Service. Policy Polit.2013;41(2):223-239. doi:10.1332/030557312x655477
  6. Nedlund AC, Garpenby P. Puzzling about problems: the ambiguous search for an evidence-based strategy for handling influx of health technology. Policy Sci. 2014;47(4):367-386. Doi:10.1007/s11077-014-9198-1
  7. Ernoft S. The Use of Health Economic Evaluations in Pharmaceutical Priority Setting. The Case of Sweden [dissertation]. Lund: Lund Business Press, Lund Institute of Economic Research, Lund University; 2010
  8. Youngkong S. Incorporating cost-effectiveness data in a fair process for priority setting efforts. Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015;4(7):483-485. doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2015.81

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 23 June 2015
  • Revise Date: 08 July 2015
  • Accept Date: 03 July 2015
  • First Publish Date: 01 August 2015

Share

How to cite

Statistics