Measuring the cost-effectiveness of treatments for people with multiple sclerosis: Beyond quality-adjusted life-years

Authors: Hawton, A., Goodwin, E., Boddy, K., Freeman, J., Thomas, S., Chataway, J. and Green, C.

Journal: Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Volume: 28

Issue: 3

Pages: 346-351

eISSN: 1477-0970

ISSN: 1352-4585

DOI: 10.1177/1352458520954172

Abstract:

Background: It is a familiar story. A promising multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment clears the three regulatory hurdles of safety, quality and efficacy, only to fall at the fourth: cost-effectiveness. This has led to concerns about the validity of the measures typically used to quantify treatment effects in cost-effectiveness analyses and in 2012, in the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence called for an improvement in the cost-effectiveness framework for assessing MS treatments. Objective and Methods: This review describes what is meant by cost-effectiveness in health/social care funding decision-making, and usual practice for assessing treatment benefits. Results: We detail the use of the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in resource allocation decisions, and set out limitations of this approach in the context of MS. Conclusion: We conclude by highlighting methodological and policy developments which should aid addressing these limitations.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/34551/

Source: Scopus

Measuring the cost-effectiveness of treatments for people with multiple sclerosis: Beyond quality-adjusted life-years.

Authors: Hawton, A., Goodwin, E., Boddy, K., Freeman, J., Thomas, S., Chataway, J. and Green, C.

Journal: Mult Scler

Volume: 28

Issue: 3

Pages: 346-351

eISSN: 1477-0970

DOI: 10.1177/1352458520954172

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: It is a familiar story. A promising multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment clears the three regulatory hurdles of safety, quality and efficacy, only to fall at the fourth: cost-effectiveness. This has led to concerns about the validity of the measures typically used to quantify treatment effects in cost-effectiveness analyses and in 2012, in the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence called for an improvement in the cost-effectiveness framework for assessing MS treatments. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: This review describes what is meant by cost-effectiveness in health/social care funding decision-making, and usual practice for assessing treatment benefits. RESULTS: We detail the use of the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in resource allocation decisions, and set out limitations of this approach in the context of MS. CONCLUSION: We conclude by highlighting methodological and policy developments which should aid addressing these limitations.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/34551/

Source: PubMed

Measuring the cost-effectiveness of treatments for people with multiple sclerosis: Beyond quality-adjusted life-years

Authors: Hawton, A., Goodwin, E., Boddy, K., Freeman, J., Thomas, S., Chataway, J. and Green, C.

Journal: MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS JOURNAL

Volume: 28

Issue: 3

Pages: 346-351

eISSN: 1477-0970

ISSN: 1352-4585

DOI: 10.1177/1352458520954172

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/34551/

Source: Web of Science (Lite)

Measuring the cost-effectiveness of treatments for people with multiple sclerosis: Beyond quality-adjusted life-years.

Authors: Hawton, A., Goodwin, E., Boddy, K., Freeman, J., Thomas, S., Chataway, J. and Green, C.

Journal: Multiple sclerosis (Houndmills, Basingstoke, England)

Volume: 28

Issue: 3

Pages: 346-351

eISSN: 1477-0970

ISSN: 1352-4585

DOI: 10.1177/1352458520954172

Abstract:

Background

It is a familiar story. A promising multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment clears the three regulatory hurdles of safety, quality and efficacy, only to fall at the fourth: cost-effectiveness. This has led to concerns about the validity of the measures typically used to quantify treatment effects in cost-effectiveness analyses and in 2012, in the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence called for an improvement in the cost-effectiveness framework for assessing MS treatments.

Objective and methods

This review describes what is meant by cost-effectiveness in health/social care funding decision-making, and usual practice for assessing treatment benefits.

Results

We detail the use of the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in resource allocation decisions, and set out limitations of this approach in the context of MS.

Conclusion

We conclude by highlighting methodological and policy developments which should aid addressing these limitations.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/34551/

Source: Europe PubMed Central

Measuring the cost-effectiveness of treatments for people with multiple sclerosis: Beyond quality-adjusted life-years.

Authors: Hawton, A., Goodwin, E., Boddy, K., Freeman, J., Thomas, S., Chataway, J. and Green, C.

Journal: Multiple Sclerosis Journal

Volume: 28

Issue: 3

Pages: 346-351

ISSN: 1352-4585

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: It is a familiar story. A promising multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment clears the three regulatory hurdles of safety, quality and efficacy, only to fall at the fourth: cost-effectiveness. This has led to concerns about the validity of the measures typically used to quantify treatment effects in cost-effectiveness analyses and in 2012, in the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence called for an improvement in the cost-effectiveness framework for assessing MS treatments. OBJECTIVE AND METHODS: This review describes what is meant by cost-effectiveness in health/social care funding decision-making, and usual practice for assessing treatment benefits. RESULTS: We detail the use of the quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) in resource allocation decisions, and set out limitations of this approach in the context of MS. CONCLUSION: We conclude by highlighting methodological and policy developments which should aid addressing these limitations.

https://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/34551/

Source: BURO EPrints