Cargando…

Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold

The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision cr...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Metcalfe, Scott, Grocott, Rachel
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) 2010
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20617061
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831
_version_ 1782181217959936000
author Metcalfe, Scott
Grocott, Rachel
author_facet Metcalfe, Scott
Grocott, Rachel
author_sort Metcalfe, Scott
collection PubMed
description The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision criteria used to inform decisions, thresholds cannot be inferred or calculated. Thresholds inadequately account for opportunity cost and affordability, and are incompatible with budgets and maximising health gains. In New Zealand, pharmaceutical investments can only be considered ‘cost-effective’ when prioritised against other proposals at the time, and threshold levels must inevitably vary with available funds and the other criteria.
format Text
id pubmed-2872338
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2010
publisher Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI)
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-28723382010-07-08 Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold Metcalfe, Scott Grocott, Rachel Int J Environ Res Public Health Commentary The Journal recently incorrectly ascribed cost-effectiveness thresholds to New Zealand, alongside other countries. New Zealand has no such thresholds when deciding the funding of pharmaceuticals. As we fund pharmaceuticals within a fixed budget, and cost-effectiveness is only one of nine decision criteria used to inform decisions, thresholds cannot be inferred or calculated. Thresholds inadequately account for opportunity cost and affordability, and are incompatible with budgets and maximising health gains. In New Zealand, pharmaceutical investments can only be considered ‘cost-effective’ when prioritised against other proposals at the time, and threshold levels must inevitably vary with available funds and the other criteria. Molecular Diversity Preservation International (MDPI) 2010-04-20 2010-04 /pmc/articles/PMC2872338/ /pubmed/20617061 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831 Text en © 2010 by the authors; licensee Molecular Diversity Preservation International, Basel, Switzerland. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0 This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
spellingShingle Commentary
Metcalfe, Scott
Grocott, Rachel
Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title_full Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title_fullStr Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title_full_unstemmed Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title_short Comments on “Simoens, S. Health Economic Assessment: A Methodological Primer. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—New Zealand in Fact Has No Cost-Effectiveness Threshold
title_sort comments on “simoens, s. health economic assessment: a methodological primer. int. j. environ. res. public health 2009, 6, 2950–2966”—new zealand in fact has no cost-effectiveness threshold
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2872338/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20617061
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph7041831
work_keys_str_mv AT metcalfescott commentsonsimoensshealtheconomicassessmentamethodologicalprimerintjenvironrespublichealth2009629502966newzealandinfacthasnocosteffectivenessthreshold
AT grocottrachel commentsonsimoensshealtheconomicassessmentamethodologicalprimerintjenvironrespublichealth2009629502966newzealandinfacthasnocosteffectivenessthreshold