Cargando…

A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments

BACKGROUND: Health technology assessment (HTA) has been reinforced in France, notably with the introduction of economic evaluation in the pricing process for the most innovative and expensive treatments. Similarly to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in England, the National Auth...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Massetti, Marc, Aballéa, Samuel, Videau, Yann, Rémuzat, Cécile, Roïz, Julie, Toumi, Mondher
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Co-Action Publishing 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802704/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27123190
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/jmahp.v3.24966
_version_ 1782422776788811776
author Massetti, Marc
Aballéa, Samuel
Videau, Yann
Rémuzat, Cécile
Roïz, Julie
Toumi, Mondher
author_facet Massetti, Marc
Aballéa, Samuel
Videau, Yann
Rémuzat, Cécile
Roïz, Julie
Toumi, Mondher
author_sort Massetti, Marc
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Health technology assessment (HTA) has been reinforced in France, notably with the introduction of economic evaluation in the pricing process for the most innovative and expensive treatments. Similarly to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in England, the National Authority for Health (HAS), which is responsible for economic evaluation of new health technologies in France, has published recommendations on the methods of economic evaluation. Since economic assessment represents a major element of HTA in England, exploring the differences between these methodological guidelines might help to comprehend both the shape and the role economic assessment is intended to have in the French health care system. METHODS: Methodological guidelines for economic evaluation in France and England have been compared topic-by-topic in order to bring out key differences in the recommended methods for economic evaluation. RESULTS: The analysis of both guidelines has revealed multiple similarities between France and England, although a number of differences were also noted regarding the elected methodology of analysis, the comparison of studies’ outcomes with cost-effectiveness thresholds, the study population to consider, the quality of life valuation methods, the perspective on costs, the types of resources considered and their valuation, the discount rates to apply in order to reflect the present value of interventions, etc. To account for these differences, modifications will be required in order to adapt economic models from one country to the other. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in HTA assessment methods occur in response to different challenges determined by the different philosophical and cultural considerations surrounding health and welfare as well as the political considerations regarding the role of public policies and the importance of their evaluation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4802704
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Co-Action Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-48027042016-04-27 A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments Massetti, Marc Aballéa, Samuel Videau, Yann Rémuzat, Cécile Roïz, Julie Toumi, Mondher J Mark Access Health Policy Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Health technology assessment (HTA) has been reinforced in France, notably with the introduction of economic evaluation in the pricing process for the most innovative and expensive treatments. Similarly to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) in England, the National Authority for Health (HAS), which is responsible for economic evaluation of new health technologies in France, has published recommendations on the methods of economic evaluation. Since economic assessment represents a major element of HTA in England, exploring the differences between these methodological guidelines might help to comprehend both the shape and the role economic assessment is intended to have in the French health care system. METHODS: Methodological guidelines for economic evaluation in France and England have been compared topic-by-topic in order to bring out key differences in the recommended methods for economic evaluation. RESULTS: The analysis of both guidelines has revealed multiple similarities between France and England, although a number of differences were also noted regarding the elected methodology of analysis, the comparison of studies’ outcomes with cost-effectiveness thresholds, the study population to consider, the quality of life valuation methods, the perspective on costs, the types of resources considered and their valuation, the discount rates to apply in order to reflect the present value of interventions, etc. To account for these differences, modifications will be required in order to adapt economic models from one country to the other. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in HTA assessment methods occur in response to different challenges determined by the different philosophical and cultural considerations surrounding health and welfare as well as the political considerations regarding the role of public policies and the importance of their evaluation. Co-Action Publishing 2015-03-12 /pmc/articles/PMC4802704/ /pubmed/27123190 http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/jmahp.v3.24966 Text en © 2015 Marc Massetti et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly cited and states its license.
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Massetti, Marc
Aballéa, Samuel
Videau, Yann
Rémuzat, Cécile
Roïz, Julie
Toumi, Mondher
A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title_full A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title_fullStr A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title_short A comparison of HAS & NICE guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
title_sort comparison of has & nice guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in the context of their respective national health care systems and cultural environments
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4802704/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27123190
http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/jmahp.v3.24966
work_keys_str_mv AT massettimarc acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT aballeasamuel acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT videauyann acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT remuzatcecile acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT roizjulie acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT toumimondher acomparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT massettimarc comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT aballeasamuel comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT videauyann comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT remuzatcecile comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT roizjulie comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments
AT toumimondher comparisonofhasniceguidelinesfortheeconomicevaluationofhealthtechnologiesinthecontextoftheirrespectivenationalhealthcaresystemsandculturalenvironments