most decision-makers value economic evaluations

1
PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 280 - 16 Sep 2000 Most decision-makers value economic evaluations Economic evaluations, for the most part, are viewed with a positive attitude by the world’s decision-makers, according to a team of investigators from The Netherlands. * They conducted interviews and surveys with physicians, hospital pharmacists, regulators and politicians in The Netherlands to gain insight into their attitudes, knowledge and actual use of economic evaluations, and compared the results with the opinions of their European colleagues. ** All respondents cited efficacy and ‘safety’ as important aspects of an assessment of a new healthcare technology, while about 75% reported that costs, savings, cost effectiveness and budget impact were the factors on which they would base their judgements. However, when asked if the use of economic evaluations was a formal requirement for the decision- making process in their situation, all but 1 respondent answered ‘no’. Nevertheless, it was revealed that about 75% of decision-makers in The Netherlands and Europe believed that economic considerations should be taken into account, at least to some extent. Several barriers to consider A range of responses were gleaned from respondents regarding real and potential barriers to the use of economic evaluations in decision support. However, 3 were identified as being the most important by all groups of decision-makers: the difficulty of moving resources from 1 budget to another cost effectiveness in real practice can be very different from that predicted in a clinical trial (i.e. the efficacy versus effectiveness debate) economic evaluations make too many assumptions. Further, a number of potential barriers to using economic evaluations were added to the list by the respondents themselves, and included: the medical profession do not accept economic evaluations as a tool ‘nonproductive’ populations and people with a lower starting utility are discriminated against the lack of available studies at present the high level of resources and time required to perform an economic evaluation. * see also PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 272: 3, 22 Jul 2000: 800763513 ** European results were obtained from the 9 European countries participating in the European Network on Methodology and Application of Economic Evaluation Techniques (EUROMET) project. Zwart-van Rijkom JEF, et al. Differences in attitudes, knowledge and use of economic evaluations in decision-making in the Netherlands: the Dutch results from the EUROMET project. PharmacoEconomics 18: 149-160, Aug 2000 800810657 1 PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 16 Sep 2000 No. 280 1173-5503/10/0280-0001/$14.95 Adis © 2010 Springer International Publishing AG. All rights reserved

Upload: lamnhan

Post on 16-Mar-2017

214 views

Category:

Documents


2 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Most decision-makers value economic evaluations

PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 280 - 16 Sep 2000

Most decision-makers valueeconomic evaluations

Economic evaluations, for the most part, are viewedwith a positive attitude by the world’s decision-makers,according to a team of investigators from TheNetherlands.*

They conducted interviews and surveys withphysicians, hospital pharmacists, regulators andpoliticians in The Netherlands to gain insight into theirattitudes, knowledge and actual use of economicevaluations, and compared the results with the opinionsof their European colleagues.**

All respondents cited efficacy and ‘safety’ asimportant aspects of an assessment of a new healthcaretechnology, while about 75% reported that costs,savings, cost effectiveness and budget impact were thefactors on which they would base their judgements.However, when asked if the use of economicevaluations was a formal requirement for the decision-making process in their situation, all but 1 respondentanswered ‘no’. Nevertheless, it was revealed that about75% of decision-makers in The Netherlands and Europebelieved that economic considerations should be takeninto account, at least to some extent.

Several barriers to considerA range of responses were gleaned from respondents

regarding real and potential barriers to the use ofeconomic evaluations in decision support. However, 3were identified as being the most important by allgroups of decision-makers:• the difficulty of moving resources from 1 budget to

another• cost effectiveness in real practice can be very

different from that predicted in a clinical trial (i.e. theefficacy versus effectiveness debate)

• economic evaluations make too many assumptions.Further, a number of potential barriers to using

economic evaluations were added to the list by therespondents themselves, and included:• the medical profession do not accept economic

evaluations as a tool• ‘nonproductive’ populations and people with a

lower starting utility are discriminated against• the lack of available studies at present• the high level of resources and time required to

perform an economic evaluation.* see also PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 272: 3, 22 Jul2000: 800763513** European results were obtained from the 9 European countriesparticipating in the European Network on Methodology andApplication of Economic Evaluation Techniques (EUROMET) project.

Zwart-van Rijkom JEF, et al. Differences in attitudes, knowledge and use ofeconomic evaluations in decision-making in the Netherlands: the Dutch resultsfrom the EUROMET project. PharmacoEconomics 18: 149-160, Aug2000 800810657

1

PharmacoEconomics & Outcomes News 16 Sep 2000 No. 2801173-5503/10/0280-0001/$14.95 Adis © 2010 Springer International Publishing AG. All rights reserved