Advertisement

Economic Evaluation and Policy Making

  • Magnus Johannesson
Part of the Developments in Health Economics and Public Policy book series (HEPP, volume 4)

Abstract

The aim of economic evaluations of health care programmes is to serve as an aid to decisions and to affect policy making. If economic evaluations of health care programmes are not going to have any impact on decisions about the allocation of resources to health care programmes, this is a meaningless activity. In this chapter we discuss different decision and policy situations where economic evaluations of health care programmes could potentially be used. We discuss economic evaluations as an aid to: the development of treatment guidelines, decisions within health care organizations, introduction of new medical technologies, reimbursement decisions, and pricing decisions. We end the chapter with some conclusions about the relationship between economic evaluations and policy making.

Keywords

Economic Evaluation Treatment Guideline Health Care Organization Health Care Financing Price Decision 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Department of Health, Housing and Community Services, Commonwealth of Australia. Draft guidelines for the pharmaceutical industry on preparation of submissions to the Pharmaceutical benefits committee, including submissions involving economic analyses. Canberra, Australia: Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services, 1990.Google Scholar
  2. Detsky AS. Guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products: a draft document for Ontario and Canada. PhannacoEconomics 1993; 3: 354–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Drummond MF, Rutten F, Brenna A, et al. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals: a European perspective. PhannacoEconomics 1993; 4: 173–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Evans D, Freund D, Dittus R, et al. The use of economic analysis as a basis for inclusion of pharmaceutical products on the pharmaceutical benefits scheme. Canberra, Australia: Department of Health, Housing, and Community Services, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. Health Care Financing Administration. Medicare Program: criteria and procedures for making medical services coverage decisions that relate to health care technology. Federal Register 1989; 54: 4302–4317.Google Scholar
  6. Henry D. Economic analysis as an aid to subsidization decisions: the development of Australian guidelines for pharmaceuticals. PhamiacoEconomics 1992; 1: 54–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. van Hout B, Rutten F. Economic appraisal of health technology in the European Community. In Schubert F (ed.). Proceedings of a Canadian collaborative workshop on phannacoeconomics. Princeton: Excerpta Medica Inc, 1993: 8–13.Google Scholar
  8. Laupacis A, Feeny D, Detsky AS, Tugwell PX. How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1992; 146: 473–481.Google Scholar
  9. Manning WG, Keeler EB, Newhouse JP, Sloss EM, Wasserman J. The costs of poor health habits. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. Neumann PJ, Johannesson M. From principle to public policy: using cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Affairs 1994; 13: 206–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ontario Ministry of Health Guidelines for preparation of economic analysis to be included in submission to the Drug Programs Branch for listing in the Ontario Drug Benefit Formulary/Comparative Drug Index. Toronto: Ministry of Health,1991.Google Scholar
  12. Ontario Ministry of Health Ontario guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. Toronto: Ministry of Health,1994.Google Scholar
  13. Weisbrod B. The health care quad ilemma: an essay on technological change, insurance, quality of care, and cost containment. Journal of Economic Literature 1991; 29: 523–552.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Magnus Johannesson
    • 1
  1. 1.Stockholm School of EconomicsSweden

Personalised recommendations