Practical issues in handling data input and uncertainty in a budget impact analysis

被引:32
作者
Nuijten, M. J. C. [1 ,2 ]
Mittendorf, T. [3 ]
Persson, U. [4 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Erasmus Univ, Inst Med Technol Assessment IMTA, NL-3000 DR Rotterdam, Netherlands
[2] Ars Accessus Med, Amsterdam, Netherlands
[3] Leibniz Univ Hannover, Ctr Hlth Econ, Hannover, Germany
[4] Lund Univ, Sch Econ & Management, Swedish Inst Hlth Econ, Lund, Sweden
[5] Lund Univ, Inst Econ Res IHE, Lund, Sweden
关键词
Budget impact; Model; Data source; ETANERCEPT; COST;
D O I
10.1007/s10198-010-0236-4
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The objective of this paper was to address the importance of dealing systematically and comprehensively with uncertainty in a budget impact analysis (BIA) in more detail. The handling of uncertainty in health economics was used as a point of reference for addressing the uncertainty in a BIA. This overview shows that standard methods of sensitivity analysis, which are used for standard data set in a health economic model (clinical probabilities, treatment patterns, resource utilisation and prices/tariffs), cannot always be used for the input data for the BIA model beyond the health economic data set for various reasons. Whereas in a health economic model, only limited data may come from a Delphi panel, a BIA model often relies on a majority of data taken from a Delphi panel. In addition, the dataset in a BIA model also includes forecasts (e.g. annual growth, uptakes curves, substitution effects, changes in prescription restrictions and guidelines, future distribution of the available treatment modalities, off-label use). As a consequence, the use of standard sensitivity analyses for BIA data set might be limited because of the lack of appropriate distributions as data sources are limited, or because of the need for forecasting. Therefore, scenario analyses might be more appropriate to capture the uncertainty in the BIA data set in the overall BIA model.
引用
收藏
页码:231 / 241
页数:11
相关论文
共 14 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 1992, GUID PHARM IND PREP
  • [2] *ARS ACC MED, 2008, SURV US BIOL
  • [3] PROBABILISTIC SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS-METHODS FOR GENERAL DECISION-MODELS
    CRITCHFIELD, GC
    WILLARD, KE
    CONNELLY, DP
    [J]. COMPUTERS AND BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH, 1986, 19 (03): : 254 - 265
  • [4] DETSKY AS, 1993, PHARMACOECONOMICS, V3, P345
  • [5] Doubilet P, 1985, Med Decis Making, V5, P157, DOI 10.1177/0272989X8500500205
  • [6] Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions
    Drummond, Michael F.
    Schwartz, J. Sanford
    Jonsson, Bengt
    Luce, Bryan R.
    Neumann, Peter J.
    Siebert, Uwe
    Sullivan, Sean D.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2008, 24 (03) : 244 - 258
  • [7] Lipsey R.G., 1990, ECONOMICS
  • [8] Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: Report of the ISPOR task force on good research practices - budget impact analysis
    Mauskopf, Josephine A.
    Sullivan, Sean D.
    Annemans, Lieven
    Caro, Jaime
    Mullins, C. Daniel
    Nuijten, Mark
    Orlewska, Ewa
    Watkins, John
    Trueman, Paul
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2007, 10 (05) : 336 - 347
  • [9] Combining a budgetary-impact analysis and a cost-effectiveness analysis using decision-analytic modelling techniques
    Nuijten, MJC
    Rutten, F
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2002, 20 (12) : 855 - 867
  • [10] A cost-cost study comparing etanercept with infliximab in rheumatoid arthritis
    Nuijten, MJC
    Engelfriet, P
    Duijn, K
    Bruijn, G
    Wierz, D
    Koopmanschap, M
    [J]. PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2001, 19 (10) : 1051 - 1064