A Health Opportunity Cost Threshold for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in the United States

被引:137
作者
Vanness, David J. [1 ]
Lomas, James [2 ]
Ahn, Hannah [1 ]
机构
[1] Penn State Univ, University Pk, PA 16802 USA
[2] Univ York, York, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
ECONOMIC-EVALUATION; MEDICAL-CARE; INSURANCE; DECISIONS; DEMAND; AFFORDABILITY; UNCERTAINTY; MORTALITY; FRAMEWORK; GROWTH;
D O I
10.7326/M20-1392
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background: Cost-effectiveness analysis is an important tool for informing treatment coverage and pricing decisions, yet no consensus exists about what threshold for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) in dollars per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained indicates whether treatments are likely to be cost-effective in the United States. Objective: To estimate a U.S. cost-effectiveness threshold based on health opportunity costs. Design: Simulation of short-term mortality and morbidity attributable to persons dropping health insurance due to increased health care expenditures passed though as premium increases. Model inputs came from demographic data and the literature; 95% uncertainty intervals (UIs) were constructed. Setting: Population-based. Participants: Simulated cohort of 100 000 individuals from the U.S. population with direct-purchase private health insurance. Measurements: Number of persons dropping insurance coverage, number of additional deaths, and QALYs lost from increased mortality and morbidity, all per increase of $10 000 000 (2019 U.S. dollars) in population treatment cost. Results: Per $10 000 000 increase in health care expenditures, 1860 persons (95% UI, 1080 to 2840 persons) were simulated to become uninsured, causing 5 deaths (UI, 3 to 11 deaths), 81 QALYs (UI, 40 to 170 QALYs) lost due to death, and 15 QALYs (UI, 6 to 32 QALYs) lost due to illness; this implies a cost-effectiveness threshold of $104 000 per QALY (UI, $51 000 to $209 000 per QALY) in 2019 U.S. dollars. Given available evidence, there is about 14% probability that the threshold exceeds $150 000 per QALY and about 48% probability that it lies below $100 000 per QALY. Limitations: Estimates were sensitive to inputs, most notably the effects of losing insurance on mortality and of premium increases on becoming uninsured. Health opportunity costs may vary by population. Nonhealth opportunity costs were excluded. Conclusion: Given current evidence, treatments with ICERs above the range $100 000 to $150 000 per QALY are unlikely to be cost-effective in the United States.
引用
收藏
页码:25 / +
页数:9
相关论文
共 80 条
[31]   Novel Approaches to Value Assessment Within the Cost-Effectiveness Framework [J].
Garrison, Louis P., Jr. ;
Jansen, Jeroen P. ;
Devlin, Nancy J. ;
Griffin, Susan .
VALUE IN HEALTH, 2019, 22 (06) :S12-S17
[32]   Lifetime Consequences of Early-Life and Midlife Access to Health Insurance: A Review [J].
Gaudette, Etienne ;
Pauley, Gwyn C. ;
Zissimopoulos, Julie M. .
MEDICAL CARE RESEARCH AND REVIEW, 2018, 75 (06) :655-720
[33]  
Ginsburg PB, 2020, EE CUMMINGS LOWER DR
[34]   Medicare and cost-effectiveness analysis: Time to ask the taxpayers [J].
Gold, Marthe R. ;
Sofaer, Shoshanna ;
Slegelberg, Taryn .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2007, 26 (05) :1399-1406
[35]   HALYs and QALYs and DALYs, oh my: Similarities and differences in summary measures of population health [J].
Gold, MR ;
Stevenson, D ;
Fryback, DG .
ANNUAL REVIEW OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2002, 23 :115-134
[36]   PRICED OUT: THE ECONOMIC AND ETHICAL COSTS OF AMERICAN HEALTH CARE [J].
Goldsmith, Jeff .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2019, 38 (08) :1407-1408
[37]  
Grosse Scott D, 2008, Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res, V8, P165, DOI 10.1586/14737167.8.2.165
[38]   National Health Care Spending In 2018: Growth Driven By Accelerations In Medicare And Private Insurance Spending [J].
Hartman, Micah ;
Martin, Anne B. ;
Benson, Joseph ;
Catlin, Aaron ;
Butler, Regina ;
Dickensheets, Bridget ;
Espinosa, Nathan ;
Grzeskiewicz, Mary Carol ;
Lassman, David ;
Oumarou, Heidi ;
Washington, Benjamin ;
Whittle, Lekha .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 2020, 39 (01) :8-17
[39]  
Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, 2017, I CLIN EC REV COLL D
[40]  
Institute for Clinical and Economic Review, 2020, 2020 VAL ASS FRAM FI