Methods for determining cost-benefit ratios for pharmaceuticals in Germany

被引:0
作者
J.- Matthias Graf v. d. Schulenburg
Christoph Vauth
Thomas Mittendorf
Wolfgang Greiner
机构
[1] Leibniz University Hanover,School of Economics and Management, Centre for Health Economics and Health System Research
[2] University of Bielefeld,Department of Public Health, Chair for Health Economics and Health Care Management
来源
The European Journal of Health Economics | 2007年 / 8卷
关键词
Statutory Health Insurance; Health Economic Evaluation; External Expert; Health Insurance Fund; Budget Impact Analysis;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
The aim of this methodological paper is to summarize evidence on how to implement cost-benefit assessment according to the new German legislative framework (Competition Enhancement Act). Given the complexity of existing health policy frameworks within industrialised countries in adapting health economics in their respective regulatory scheme, no clear international scientific consensus on which health economic methods should be chosen for assessment can be determined. Nevertheless, a broad consensus on the internal properties of methods itself can be found. Based on these common international standards in methodology, this work provides a minimum catalogue of methods and criteria that meet legal and local German requirements with regard to specific factors of its health care system. Aside from categorising clearly defined standards (e.g., study forms, cost and benefit categories) the suggested catalogue specifies some intensively debated areas in Germany (e.g., the QALY, modelling, the perspective used in the assessment). After the proposition of certain methods the paper leads to a first recommendation of a detailed assessment-process itself specific for the German way in implementing cost-benefit ratios within regulatory decision making in Germany.
引用
收藏
页码:5 / 31
页数:26
相关论文
共 170 条
  • [31] Briggs A.H.(2005)Modelle als Intrument der Gesunheitsökonomie Gesund. Ökon. Qual. Manag. 10 37-615
  • [32] Briggs A.H.(2007)Definitions and validation criteria for biomarkers and surrogate endpoints: development and testing of a quantitative hierarchical levels of evidence schema J. Rheumatol. 34 607-185
  • [33] Gray A.M.(2002)Burden of illness Ment. Health Serv. Res. 4 179-129
  • [34] Briggs A.H.(2001)Addressing uncertainty in medical cost-effectiveness analysis implications of expected utility maximization for methods to perform sensitivity analysis and the use of cost-effectiveness analysis to set priorities for medical research J. Health Econ. 20 109-445
  • [35] O’Brien B.J.(1994)Quantifying the burden of disease: the technical basis for disability-adjusted life years Bull. World Health Organ. 72 429-730
  • [36] Brouwer W.B.(1997)Understanding DALYs (disability-adjusted life years) J. Health Econ. 16 703-877
  • [37] Koopmanschap M.(1992)An alternative to QALYs: the saved young life equivalent (SAVE) BMJ 305 875-2670
  • [38] Brouwer W.B.(1992)Quality adjustment of life years—possibilities, limitations, alternatives Tidsskr. Nor Laegeforen. 112 2668-371
  • [39] Niessen L.W.(2006)Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment: a review and consolidation of quality assessment Pharmacoeconomics 24 355-241
  • [40] Postma M.J.(2004)Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment Health Technol. Assess. 8 1-51