On discount rates for economic evaluations in global health

被引:172
作者
Haacker, Markus [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Hallett, Timothy B. [4 ]
Atun, Rifat [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Harvard Univ, Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Global Hlth & Populat, 677 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] UCL, Fac Populat Hlth Sci, Ctr Global Hlth Econ, 30 Guilford St, London WC1N 1EH, England
[3] Ctr Global Dev, 2055 L St NW, Washington, DC 20036 USA
[4] St Marys Hosp, Imperial Coll London, Ctr Global Infect Dis Anal, MRC,Sch Publ Hlth, Norfolk Pl, London W2 1PG, England
[5] Harvard Univ, Harvard Med Sch, Dept Global Hlth & Social Med, 641 Huntington Ave, Boston, MA 02115 USA
基金
英国医学研究理事会;
关键词
Discount rates; global health; cost-effectiveness analysis; benefit-cost analysis; economic growth; low-income countries; middle-income countries; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; RECOMMENDATIONS; BENEFIT; PANEL;
D O I
10.1093/heapol/czz127
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Choices on discount rates have important implications for the outcomes of economic evaluations of health interventions and policies. In global health, such evaluations typically apply a discount rate of 3% for health outcomes and costs, mirroring guidance developed for high-income countries, notably the USA. The article investigates the suitability of these guidelines for global health [i.e. with a focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)] and seeks to identify best practice. Our analysis builds on an overview of the academic literature on discounting in health evaluations, existing academic or government-related guidelines on discounting, a review on discount rates applied in economic evaluations in global health, and cross-country macroeconomic data. The social discount rate generally applied in global health of 3% annually is inconsistent with rates of economic growth experienced outside the most advanced economies. For low- and lower-middle-income countries, a discount rate of at least 5% is more appropriate, and one around 4% for upper-middle-income countries. Alternative approaches-e.g. motivated by the returns to alternative investments or by the cost of financing-could usefully be applied, dependent on policy context. The current practise could lead to systematic bias towards over-valuing the future costs and health benefits of interventions. For health economic evaluations in global health, guidelines on discounting need to be adapted to take account of the different economic contexts of LMICs.
引用
收藏
页码:107 / 114
页数:8
相关论文
共 42 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2018, World Bank Country and Lending Groups
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2017, Discounting for Public Policy: Theory and Recent Evidence on the Merits of Updating the Discount Rate
[3]   Determining Benefits and Costs for Future Generations [J].
Arrow, K. ;
Cropper, M. ;
Gollier, C. ;
Groom, B. ;
Heal, G. ;
Newell, R. ;
Nordhaus, W. ;
Pindyck, R. ;
Pizer, W. ;
Portney, P. ;
Sterner, T. ;
Tol, R. S. J. ;
Weitzman, M. .
SCIENCE, 2013, 341 (6144) :349-350
[4]   Should Governments Use a Declining Discount Rate in Project Analysis? [J].
Arrow, Kenneth J. ;
Cropper, Maureen L. ;
Gollier, Christian ;
Groom, Ben ;
Heal, Geoffrey M. ;
Newell, Richard G. ;
Nordhaus, William D. ;
Pindyck, Robert S. ;
Pizer, William A. ;
Portney, Paul R. ;
Sterner, Thomas ;
Tol, Richard S. J. ;
Weitzman, Martin L. .
REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS AND POLICY, 2014, 8 (02) :145-163
[5]  
Arrow KJ, 2000, WORLD BANK RES OBSER, V15, P173
[6]   Discounting in Economic Evaluations [J].
Attema, Arthur E. ;
Brouwer, Werner B. F. ;
Claxton, Karl .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2018, 36 (07) :745-758
[7]  
BAUMOL WJ, 1968, AM ECON REV, V58, P788
[8]   Need for differential discounting of costs and health effects in cost effectiveness analyses [J].
Brouwer, WBF ;
Niessen, LW ;
Postma, MJ ;
Rutten, FFH .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2005, 331 (7514) :446-448
[9]  
Burgess D. F., 2011, J BENEFIT COST ANAL, V2, P1, DOI DOI 10.2202/2152-2812.1065
[10]   The most appropriate discount rate [J].
Burgess, David F. ;
Zerbe, Richard O. .
JOURNAL OF BENEFIT-COST ANALYSIS, 2013, 4 (03) :391-400