Skip to main content
Log in

Using Economic Evaluations to Reduce the Burden of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease

  • Current Opinion
  • Published:
PharmacoEconomics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

There is increasing interest in the use of economic evaluations in healthcare, because of the need to maximise health benefits from limited resources. The focus of most economic evaluations is on efficiency, though they may also consider the issue of equity. In an economic evaluation, it is important to consider all the relevant costs, not just the acquisition cost of the treatment. Likewise, it is important to include all the benefits in the economic appraisal, although the outcomes of relevance to decision-makers may differ according to their perspective. If an intervention costs less but delivers fewer benefits than the comparator or, more commonly, a new intervention increases benefits compared with standard therapy but at increased cost, decision-makers must consider whether the extra cost is worth the extra benefit. This depends on the opportunity cost of introducing the new intervention — i.e. the benefit forgone by doing less of something else to fund it. In other words, decision-makers need to decide on the maximum amount they are willing to pay for an additional unit of health benefit.

The result of an economic evaluation will be strongly influenced by the information used in the analysis. Currently, clinical trials are the most common source of data for economic evaluations. Yet there are a number of limitations in the information generated by clinical trials, which are primarily designed for regulatory approval. Consequently, decision analytical models are being increasingly used to synthesise data from various sources and to manage uncertainty in input parameters. When using economic evaluations, decision-makers may be unwilling to take a broad perspective on costs, focusing instead on their narrow budgetary concerns. Incentives may be required within healthcare systems to ensure that decision-makers adhere more strictly to the results of formal analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Table I
Table II
Table III
Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Drummond MF, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997

    Google Scholar 

  2. Wagstaff A. QALYs and the equity-efficacy trade-off. J Health Econ 1991: 10; 21–41

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. National Institute for Clinical Excellence. Technical guidance for manufacturers and sponsors on making a submission to a technology appraisal. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence, 2001. (http://www.nice.org.uk)

  4. Bateman ED. Using clinical measures of disease control to reduce the burden of asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19 Suppl. 2: 7–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Rutten van-Mölken MP, Van Doorslaer EK, Jansen M. Cost effectiveness of inhaled corticosteroid plus bronchodilator therapy versus bronchodilator monotherapy in children with asthma. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4: 257–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sculpher MJ, Buxton MJ. The episode-free day as a composite measure of effectiveness: an illustrative economic evaluation of formoterol versus salbutamol in asthma therapy. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4: 345–52

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Drummond MF, Davies L. Economic analysis alongside clinical trials. Revisiting the methodological issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1991: 7; 561–73

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sculpher M, Fenwick E, Claxton K. Assessing quality in decision analytic cost-effectiveness models: a suggested framework and example of application. Pharmacoeconomics 2000: 17 (5); 461–77

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sculpher, M. Using Economic Evaluations to Reduce the Burden of Asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. Pharmacoeconomics 19 (Suppl 2), 21–25 (2001). https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200119002-00004

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200119002-00004

Keywords

Navigation