Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Bulletin of the World Health Organization logoLink to Bulletin of the World Health Organization
. 1994;72(4):663–674.

Cost-effectiveness analysis and policy choices: investing in health systems.

C J Murray 1, J Kreuser 1, W Whang 1
PMCID: PMC2486597  PMID: 7923545

Abstract

The role of health systems infrastructure in studies of cost-effectiveness analysis and health resource allocation is discussed, and previous health sector cost-effectiveness analyses are cited. Two substantial difficulties concerning the nature of health system costs and the policy choices are presented. First, the issue of health system infrastructure can be addressed by use of computer models such as the Health Resource Allocation Model (HRAM) developed at Harvard, which integrates cost-effectiveness and burden of disease data. It was found that a model which allows for expansion in health infrastructure yields nearly 40% more total DALYs for a hypothetical sub-Saharan African country than a model which neglects infrastructure expansion. Widespread use of cost-effectiveness databases for resource allocations in the health sector will require the cost-effectiveness analyses shift from reporting costs to reporting production functions. Second, three distinct policy questions can be treated using these tools, each necessitating its own inputs and constraints: allocations when given a fixed budget and health infrastructure, or when given resources for marginal expansion, or when given a politically constrained situation of expanding resources. Confusion concerning which question is being addressed must be avoided through development of a consistent and rigorous approach to using cost-effectiveness data for informing resource allocations.

Full text

PDF
663

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Allen D., Lee R. H., Lowson K. The use of QALYS (quality-adjusted life years) in health service planning. Int J Health Plann Manage. 1989 Oct-Dec;4(4):261–273. doi: 10.1002/hpm.4740040403. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Birch S., Gafni A. Cost effectiveness/utility analyses. Do current decision rules lead us to where we want to be? J Health Econ. 1992 Oct;11(3):279–296. doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(92)90004-k. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bobadilla J. L., Cowley P., Musgrove P., Saxenian H. Design, content and financing of an essential national package of health services. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(4):653–662. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown L. D. The national politics of Oregon's rationing plan. Health Aff (Millwood) 1991 Summer;10(2):28–51. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.10.2.28. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Dixon J., Welch H. G. Priority setting: lessons from Oregon. Lancet. 1991 Apr 13;337(8746):891–894. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90213-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Drummond M., Torrance G., Mason J. Cost-effectiveness league tables: more harm than good? Soc Sci Med. 1993 Jul;37(1):33–40. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(93)90315-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Eddy D. M. Oregon's methods. Did cost-effectiveness analysis fail? JAMA. 1991 Oct 16;266(15):2135–2141. doi: 10.1001/jama.266.15.2135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fox D. M., Leichter H. M. Rationing care in Oregon: the new accountability. Health Aff (Millwood) 1991 Summer;10(2):7–27. doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.10.2.7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Garland M. J., Hasnain R. Health care in common: setting priorities in Oregon. Hastings Cent Rep. 1990 Sep-Oct;20(5):16–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hadorn D. C. Setting health care priorities in Oregon. Cost-effectiveness meets the rule of rescue. JAMA. 1991 May 1;265(17):2218–2225. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Johannesson M., Jönsson B. Economic evaluation in health care: is there a role for cost-benefit analysis? Health Policy. 1991 Feb;17(1):1–23. doi: 10.1016/0168-8510(91)90114-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kitzhaber J. A. Prioritising health services in an era of limits: the Oregon experience. BMJ. 1993 Aug 7;307(6900):373–377. doi: 10.1136/bmj.307.6900.373. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Krahn M., Gafni A. Discounting in the economic evaluation of health care interventions. Med Care. 1993 May;31(5):403–418. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199305000-00003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Loomes G., McKenzie L. The use of QALYs in health care decision making. Soc Sci Med. 1989;28(4):299–308. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(89)90030-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Mehrez A., Gafni A. Quality-adjusted life years, utility theory, and healthy-years equivalents. Med Decis Making. 1989 Apr-Jun;9(2):142–149. doi: 10.1177/0272989X8900900209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Messing S. D. Discounting health: the issue of subsistence and care in an undeveloped country. Soc Sci Med. 1973 Nov;7(11):911–916. doi: 10.1016/0037-7856(73)90113-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Miyamoto J. M., Eraker S. A. Parameter estimates for a QALY utility model. Med Decis Making. 1985 Summer;5(2):191–213. doi: 10.1177/0272989X8500500208. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Murray C. J., Lopez A. D. Global and regional cause-of-death patterns in 1990. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):447–480. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Murray C. J., Lopez A. D., Jamison D. T. The global burden of disease in 1990: summary results, sensitivity analysis and future directions. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):495–509. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Murray C. J., Lopez A. D. Quantifying disability: data, methods and results. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):481–494. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Murray C. J. Quantifying the burden of disease: the technical basis for disability-adjusted life years. Bull World Health Organ. 1994;72(3):429–445. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Olsen J. A. On what basis should health be discounted? J Health Econ. 1993 Apr;12(1):39–53. doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(93)90039-h. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Omran A. R. The epidemiologic transition theory. A preliminary update. J Trop Pediatr. 1983 Dec;29(6):305–316. doi: 10.1093/tropej/29.6.305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ostbye T., Speechley M. The Oregon formula: a better method of allocating health care resources. Nord Med. 1992;107(3):92–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Parsonage M., Neuburger H. Discounting and health benefits. Health Econ. 1992 Apr;1(1):71–76. doi: 10.1002/hec.4730010110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Phelps C. E., Mushlin A. I. On the (near) equivalence of cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1991;7(1):12–21. doi: 10.1017/s0266462300004803. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Sackett D. L., Torrance G. W. The utility of different health states as perceived by the general public. J Chronic Dis. 1978;31(11):697–704. doi: 10.1016/0021-9681(78)90072-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Torrance G. W. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ. 1986 Mar;5(1):1–30. doi: 10.1016/0167-6296(86)90020-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Torrance G. W., Thomas W. H., Sackett D. L. A utility maximization model for evaluation of health care programs. Health Serv Res. 1972 Summer;7(2):118–133. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Torrance G. W., Zipursky A. Cost-effectiveness of antepartum prevention of Rh immunization. Clin Perinatol. 1984 Jun;11(2):267–281. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Williams A. Economics of coronary artery bypass grafting. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1985 Aug 3;291(6491):326–329. doi: 10.1136/bmj.291.6491.326. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Bulletin of the World Health Organization are provided here courtesy of World Health Organization

RESOURCES