Source 3
What is cost-utility analysis?
McCabe, C. (2009, February). What is cost-utility analysis? What Is…? Series.
McCabe, C. (2009, February). What is cost-utility analysis? What Is…? Series.
Cost Utility Analysis
Purpose
This article explains, in detail, what Cost Utility Analysis (CUA) is and how it is used. The article breaks down the method of CUA and discusses what and who CUA effects as well as advantages and disadvantages of the system.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths:
o Facilitates the comparison between different
medical interventions, which is better than
cost-benefit analysis.
o Can address values relating to morbidity and
mortality improvements.
o Straightforward and inexpensive to use.
Weaknesses:
o Inability to capture all of the valued
characteristics.
o Does not account for variables which are
valued by patients.
o Lack of appropriateness regarding mild, non
life-threatening, conditions.
o Inability to address societal attitudes towards
health related matters.
Description
The article did not explain the process of conducting cost utility analysis in detail, but did discuss Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER). ICER is used to compare Quality-Adjusted Life Years (QUALs), which is the unit of measurement derived from the CUA formula. Once ICERs are identified and calculated, decision-makers can begin to evaluate interventions or programs based on their cost effectiveness.
Uses
Used by decision makers in the health-care profession. It provides a way for administrators to compare the economic values of medical interventions or procedures. Some issues about the method’s effectiveness include the lack of consideration for human-factor related variables. The article demonstrates benefits for using the CUA method, as well as logically advising on some warnings related to its disadvantages. The article clearly states that CUA is not to be used as the sole source of information for decision-makers to use for fund allocation.
Comparison
The article addressed many peripheral issues related to CUA which are not usually discussed. The author appears to be writing for an audience that already understands the method with at least a basic familiarization and explores advantages as well as drawbacks to its use.
Sources Cited
The author of the commentary listed the following sources for further information:
The author of the commentary listed the following sources for further information:
· Brazier JE, Ratcliffe J, Tsuchiya A, Salomon J. Measuring
and Valuing Health Benefits for Economic Evaluation.
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
· Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision Modelling for
Health Economic Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press, 2006.
· Coast J. Is economic evaluation in touch with society’s
values? BMJ 2004; 329: 1233–1236.
· Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien
BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of
Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2005.
· Fallowfield L. What is quality of life? London: Hayward
Medical Communications, 2009.
· Martin S, Rice N, Smith PC. Further Evidence on the Link
Between Health Care Spending and Health Outcomes in
England. CHE Research Paper 32. York: University of York,
2007.
· McCabe C, Claxton K, Culyer A. The NICE cost effectiveness threshold: what it is and what that means.
Pharmacoeconomics 2008; 26: 733–744.
Most Informative
The most informative insight from the article is the discussion regarding ICERs and how they are applied to the decision-making process. It is imperative that professionals using CUA note that there are non-addressed variables which could significantly impact their decisions if CUA is the only method used to arrive at an allocation or choice of initiative.
Source Author
Christopher McCabe is a professor of health economics at the University of Leeds Health Institute in the United Kingdom. With over 10 years in the health economics field, Dr. McCabe serves as the Director of the Decision Support Unit for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Additionally, Dr. McCabe has written several different peer reviewed works on the topics of health economics. As the author of this article, Dr. McGregor has adequate education and knowledge regarding the subject matter and is a reliable source regarding the use of CUA.
Source Reliability
According to the Dax Norman Trust Evaluation Worksheet for online sources, the source has a High Reliability rating.
Critique Author
Mark L.
The most informative insight from the article is the discussion regarding ICERs and how they are applied to the decision-making process. It is imperative that professionals using CUA note that there are non-addressed variables which could significantly impact their decisions if CUA is the only method used to arrive at an allocation or choice of initiative.
Source Author
Christopher McCabe is a professor of health economics at the University of Leeds Health Institute in the United Kingdom. With over 10 years in the health economics field, Dr. McCabe serves as the Director of the Decision Support Unit for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Additionally, Dr. McCabe has written several different peer reviewed works on the topics of health economics. As the author of this article, Dr. McGregor has adequate education and knowledge regarding the subject matter and is a reliable source regarding the use of CUA.
Source Reliability
According to the Dax Norman Trust Evaluation Worksheet for online sources, the source has a High Reliability rating.
Critique Author
Mark L.
Mercyhurst College, Erie PA,
Advanced Analytic Techniques Course
January 14, 2011
No comments:
Post a Comment