Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis for national-level priority-setting in the health sector
- PDF / 782,004 Bytes
- 13 Pages / 610 x 792 pts Page_size
- 75 Downloads / 177 Views
BioMed Central
Open Access
Methodology
Generalized cost-effectiveness analysis for national-level priority-setting in the health sector Raymond Hutubessy1, Dan Chisholm*2, Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer2 and WHOCHOICE Address: 1Stop TB Programme (STB), HIV/AIDS, TB and Malaria cluster (HTM), World Health Organization and 2Department of Evidence for Health Policy, Evidence and Information for Policy, World Health Organization Email: Raymond Hutubessy - [email protected]; Dan Chisholm* - [email protected]; Tessa Tan-Torres Edejer - [email protected]; WHOCHOICE * Corresponding author
Published: 19 December 2003 Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 2003, 1:8
Received: 06 May 2003 Accepted: 19 December 2003
This article is available from: http://www.resource-allocation.com/content/1/1/8 © 2003 Hutubessy et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article: verbatim copying and redistribution of this article are permitted in all media for any purpose, provided this notice is preserved along with the article's original URL.
Abstract Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is potentially an important aid to public health decision-making but, with some notable exceptions, its use and impact at the level of individual countries is limited. A number of potential reasons may account for this, among them technical shortcomings associated with the generation of current economic evidence, political expediency, social preferences and systemic barriers to implementation. As a form of sectoral CEA, Generalized CEA sets out to overcome a number of these barriers to the appropriate use of cost-effectiveness information at the regional and country level. Its application via WHO-CHOICE provides a new economic evidence base, as well as underlying methodological developments, concerning the costeffectiveness of a range of health interventions for leading causes of, and risk factors for, disease. The estimated sub-regional costs and effects of different interventions provided by WHOCHOICE can readily be tailored to the specific context of individual countries, for example by adjustment to the quantity and unit prices of intervention inputs (costs) or the coverage, efficacy and adherence rates of interventions (effectiveness). The potential usefulness of this information for health policy and planning is in assessing if current intervention strategies represent an efficient use of scarce resources, and which of the potential additional interventions that are not yet implemented, or not implemented fully, should be given priority on the grounds of costeffectiveness. Health policy-makers and programme managers can use results from WHO-CHOICE as a valuable input into the planning and prioritization of services at national level, as well as a starting point for additional analyses of the trade-off between the efficiency of interventions in producing health and their impact on other key outcomes such as reducing inequalities and improving the health of the poor.
Introduction The inclusion of an economic perspective in the evalua
Data Loading...
