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.
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.
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
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.Source: Europe PubMed Central