1
|
Saber W, Bansal A, Li L, Scott BL, Sangaralingham LR, Thao V, Roth JA, Wright W, Steuten LMG, Pidala JA, Mishra A, Maziarz RT, Westervelt P, McGuirk JP, Cutler C, Nakamura R, Ramsey SD. Cost-Effectiveness of Reduced-Intensity Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation for Older Patients With High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome: Analysis of BMT CTN 1102. JCO Oncol Pract 2024; 20:572-580. [PMID: 38261970 DOI: 10.1200/op.23.00413] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2023] [Revised: 09/07/2023] [Accepted: 10/25/2023] [Indexed: 01/25/2024] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE BMT CTN 1102 was a phase III trial comparing reduced-intensity allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (RIC alloHCT) to standard of care for persons with intermediate- or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We report results of a cost-effectiveness analysis conducted alongside the clinical trial. METHODS Three hundred eighty-four patients received HCT (n = 260) or standard of care (n = 124) according to availability of a human leukocyte antigen-matched donor. Cost-effectiveness was calculated from US commercial and Medicare perspectives over a 20-year time horizon. Health care utilization and costs were estimated using propensity score-matched cohorts of HCT recipients in the OptumLabs Data Warehouse (age 50-64 years) and Medicare (age 65 years and older). EuroQol 5 Dimension (EQ-5D) surveys of trial participants were used to derive health state utilities. RESULTS Extrapolated 20-year overall survival for those age 50-64 years was 29% for HCT (n = 105) versus 13% for usual care (n = 44) and 31% for HCT (n = 155) versus 12% for non-HCT (n = 80) for those age 65 years and older. HCT was more effective (+2.36 quality-adjusted life-years [QALYs] for age 50-64 years and +2.92 QALYs for age 65 years and older) and more costly (+$452,242 in US dollars (USD) for age 50-64 years and +$233,214 USD for age 65 years and older) than usual care, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of $191,487 (USD)/QALY and $79,834 (USD)/QALY, respectively. For persons age 50-64 years, there was a 29% chance that HCT was cost-effective using a willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $150K (USD)/QALY and 51% at a $200K (USD)/QALY. For persons age 65 years and older, the probability was 100% at a WTP >$150K (USD)/QALY. CONCLUSION Among patients age 65 years and older with high-risk MDS, RIC HCT is a high-value strategy. For those age 50-64 years, HCT is a lower-value strategy but has similar cost-effectiveness to other therapies commonly used in oncology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wael Saber
- Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI
| | - Aasthaa Bansal
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| | - Lily Li
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
| | | | - Lindsey R Sangaralingham
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Health Care Policy and Research (X.Y., N.D.S.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Viengneesee Thao
- Robert D. and Patricia E. Kern Center for the Science of Health Care Delivery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
- Department of Health Sciences Research, Division of Health Care Policy and Research (X.Y., N.D.S.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN
| | - Joshua A Roth
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA
- Pfizer Inc, New York, NY
| | | | | | | | | | - Richard T Maziarz
- Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR
| | | | | | | | | | - Scott D Ramsey
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center, Seattle, WA
- University of Washington, Seattle, WA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mahdiani H, Münch N, Paul NW. A QALY is [still] a QALY is [still] a QALY? : Evaluating proportional shortfall as the answer to the problem of equity in healthcare allocations. BMC Med Ethics 2024; 25:35. [PMID: 38521941 PMCID: PMC10960401 DOI: 10.1186/s12910-024-01036-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/19/2023] [Accepted: 03/11/2024] [Indexed: 03/25/2024] Open
Abstract
Despite clinical evidence of drug superiority, therapeutic modalities, like combination immunotherapy, are mostly considered cost-ineffective due to their high costs per life year(s) gained. This paper, taking an ethical stand, reevaluates the standard cost-effectiveness analysis with that of the more recent justice-enhanced methods and concludes by pointing out the shortcomings of the current methodologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hamideh Mahdiani
- Institute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Am Pulverturm 13, 55131, Mainz, Germany.
| | - Nikolai Münch
- Institute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Am Pulverturm 13, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| | - Norbert W Paul
- Institute for History, Philosophy and Ethics of Medicine, Johannes Gutenberg University Medical Center, Am Pulverturm 13, 55131, Mainz, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Smajdor A. Response to comments on my paper on whole body gestational donation. THEORETICAL MEDICINE AND BIOETHICS 2023; 44:393-399. [PMID: 37642830 PMCID: PMC10491506 DOI: 10.1007/s11017-023-09646-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/11/2023] [Indexed: 08/31/2023]
|
4
|
Herlitz A. Cost-Effectiveness, Incompleteness, and Discrimination. Camb Q Healthc Ethics 2022; 32:1-11. [PMID: 36330813 DOI: 10.1017/s0963180122000263] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/06/2022]
Abstract
This paper argues that cost-effectiveness analysis in the healthcare sector introduces a discrimination risk that has thus far been underappreciated and outlines some approaches one can take toward this. It is argued that appropriate standards used in cost-effectiveness analysis in the healthcare sector fail to always fully determine an optimal option, which entails that cost-effectiveness analysis often leaves decision makers with large sets of permissible options. Larger sets of permissible options increase the role of decision makers' biases, whims, and prejudices, which means that the discrimination risk increases. Two ways of mitigating this are identified: tinkering with standards used in the cost-effectiveness analysis and outlining anti-discrimination guidelines for decision makers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anders Herlitz
- Institute for Futures Studies, Box 591, 101 31 Stockholm, Sweden
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Avanceña ALV, Prosser LA. Examining Equity Effects of Health Interventions in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Systematic Review. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2021; 24:136-143. [PMID: 33431148 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.10.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/09/2020] [Revised: 09/09/2020] [Accepted: 10/06/2020] [Indexed: 05/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This systematic review aims to catalogue and describe published applications of equity-informative cost-effectiveness analysis (CEAs). METHODS Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched Medline for English-language, peer-reviewed CEAs published on or before August 2019. We included CEAs that evaluated 2 or more alternatives; explicitly mentioned equity as a consideration or decision-making principle; and applied an equity-informative CEA method to analyze or examine at least 1 equity criterion in an applied CEA. We extracted data on selected characteristics and analyzed reporting quality using the CHEERS checklist. RESULTS Fifty-four articles identified through a search and bibliography reviews met the inclusion criteria. All articles were published on or after 2010, with 80% published after 2015. Most studies evaluated primary prevention interventions in disease areas such as cancer, infectious diseases, and cardiovascular disease. Equity impact analysis alone was the most common equity-informative CEA (56%), followed by equity impact analysis with financial protection effects (30%). At least 11 different equity criteria have been used in equity-informative CEAs; socioeconomic status and race/ethnicity were used most frequently. Seventy-eight percent of studies reported finding "greater value" in an intervention after examining its distributional effects. CONCLUSION The number of equity-informative CEAs is increasing, and the wide range of equity criteria, diseases, interventions, settings, and populations represented suggests that broad application of these methods is feasible but will require further refinement. Inclusion of equity into CEAs may shift the value of evaluated interventions and can provide crucial additional information for decision makers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anton L V Avanceña
- Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
| | - Lisa A Prosser
- Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA; Susan B. Meister Child Health Evaluation and Research (CHEAR) Center, Department of Pediatrics, Medical School, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Gavan SP, Daker-White G, Payne K, Barton A. Factors that influence rheumatologists' anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha prescribing decisions: a qualitative study. BMC Rheumatol 2020; 3:47. [PMID: 31891115 PMCID: PMC6921483 DOI: 10.1186/s41927-019-0097-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2019] [Accepted: 10/10/2019] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Treatment decisions for any disease are usually informed by reference to published clinical guidelines or recommendations. These recommendations can be developed to improve the relative cost-effectiveness of health care and to reduce regional variation in clinical practice. Anti-tumor necrosis factor alpha (anti-TNF) treatments are prescribed for people with rheumatoid arthritis according to specific recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence in England. Evidence of regional variation in clinical practice for rheumatoid arthritis may indicate that different factors have an influence on routine prescribing decisions. The aim of this study was to understand the factors that influence rheumatologists’ decisions when prescribing anti-TNF treatments for people with rheumatoid arthritis in England. Methods Semi-structured one-to-one telephone interviews were performed with senior rheumatologists in different regions across England. The interview schedule addressed recommendations by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, prescribing behavior, and perceptions of anti-TNF treatments. Interviews were recorded digitally, transcribed verbatim, and anonymized. Data were analyzed by thematic framework analysis that comprised six stages (familiarization; coding; developing the framework; applying the framework; generating the matrix; interpretation). Results Eleven rheumatologists (regional distribution - north 36%; midlands: 36%; south: 27%) participated (response rate: 24% of the sampling frame). The mean duration of the interviews was thirty minutes (range: 16 to 56 min). Thirteen factors that influenced anti-TNF prescribing decisions were categorized by three nested primary themes; specific influences were defined as subthemes: (i) External Environment Influences (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Recommendations; Clinical Commissioning Groups; Cost Pressures; Published Clinical Evidence; Colleagues in Different Hospitals; Pharmaceutical Industry); (ii) Internal Hospital Influences (Systems to Promote Compliance with Clinical Recommendations; Internal Treatment Pathways; Hospital Culture); (iii) Individual-level Influences (Patient Influence; Clinical Autonomy; Consultant Experience; Perception of Disease Activity Score-28 (DAS28) Outcome). Conclusions Factors that influenced anti-TNF prescribing decisions were multifaceted, seemed to vary by region, and may facilitate divergence from published clinical recommendations. Strategic behavior appeared to illustrate a conflict between uniform treatment recommendations and clinical autonomy. These influences may contribute to understanding sources of regional variation in clinical practice for rheumatoid arthritis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sean P Gavan
- 1Manchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL UK.,2NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Gavin Daker-White
- 3NIHR Greater Manchester Patient Safety Translational Research Centre, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| | - Katherine Payne
- 1Manchester Centre for Health Economics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL UK.,2NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK
| | - Anne Barton
- 2NIHR Manchester Biomedical Research Centre, Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.,4Arthritis Research UK Centre for Genetics and Genomics, Centre for Musculoskeletal Research, Division of Musculoskeletal and Dermatological Sciences, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Basu A, Carlson J, Veenstra D. Health Years in Total: A New Health Objective Function for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2020; 23:96-103. [PMID: 31952678 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.10.014] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/10/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 10/16/2019] [Indexed: 06/10/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES To find an alternative for quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) and equal value of life (EVL) measures. Despite the importance of QALY in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA)-because it captures the effects of both life expectancy and health-related quality of life (QOL) and enables comparisons across interventions and disease areas-its potential to be discriminatory towards patients with lower QOL presents a critical challenge that has resulted in the exclusion of its use in some public decision making (eg, US Medicare) on healthcare in the United States. Alternatives to QALY, such as EVL, have not gained traction because EVL fails to recognize the QOL gains during added years of life. METHODS We present a new metric for effectiveness for CEA, health years in total (HYT), which overcomes both the specific distributional issue raised by QALY and the efficiency challenges of EVL. RESULTS The HYT framework separates life expectancy changes and QOL changes on an additive scale. HYT have the same axiomatic foundations as QALY and perform better than both QALY, in terms of the discriminatory implications, and EVL, in terms of capturing QOL gains during added years of life. HYT are straightforward to calculate within a CEA model. We found that thresholds of $34 000/HYT and $89 000/HYT correspond to CEA thresholds of $50 000/QALY and $150 000/QALY, respectively. CONCLUSIONS The HYT framework may provide a viable alternative to both the QALY and the EVL; its application to diverse healthcare technologies and stakeholder assessments are important next steps in its development and evaluation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anirban Basu
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA; Departments of Health Services & Economics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.
| | - Josh Carlson
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| | - David Veenstra
- The Comparative Health Outcomes, Policy, and Economics Institute, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
A flexible formula for incorporating distributive concerns into cost-effectiveness analyses: Priority weights. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0223866. [PMID: 31600342 PMCID: PMC6786599 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223866] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/28/2019] [Accepted: 09/29/2019] [Indexed: 01/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Cost effectiveness analyses (CEAs) are widely used to evaluate the opportunity cost of health care investments. However, few functions that take equity concerns into account are available for such CEA methods, and these concerns are therefore at risk of being disregarded. Among the functions that have been developed, most focus on the distribution of health gains, as opposed to the distribution of lifetime health. This is despite the fact that there are good reasons to give higher priority to individuals and groups with a low quality adjusted life expectancy from birth (QALE). Also, an even distribution of health gains may imply an uneven distribution of lifetime health. Methods We develop a systematic and explicit approach that allows for the inclusion of lifetime health concerns in CEAs, by creating a new priority weight function, PW = α+(t-γ)·C·e-β·(t-γ), where t is the health measure. PW has several desirable properties. First, it is continuous and smooth, ensuring that people with similar health characteristics are treated alike. For example, those who achieve 50 QALE should be treated similarly to those who achieve 49.9 QALE. Second, it is flexible regarding shape and outcome measure (i.e., caters to other measures than QALE), so that a broad range of values may be modelled. Third, the coefficients have distinct roles. This allows for the easy manipulation of the PW’s shape. In order to demonstrate how PW may be applied, we use data from a previous study and estimated the coefficients of PW based on two approaches. Conclusions Equity concerns are important when conducting CEAs, which means that suitable PWs should be developed. We do not intend to determine which PW is the most appropriate, but to illustrate how a flexible general PW can be estimated based on empirical data.
Collapse
|
9
|
Dixon P, Round J. Caring for Carers: Positive and Normative Challenges for Future Research on Carer Spillover Effects in Economic Evaluation. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 22:549-554. [PMID: 31104733 PMCID: PMC6524130 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.10.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/14/2018] [Revised: 10/04/2018] [Accepted: 10/09/2018] [Indexed: 06/09/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Many individuals rely on family and friends to provide care outside of the formal healthcare sector. The need for caring is driven by many factors, including government policies toward health and social care, and increased prevalence of chronic and comorbid conditions. Informal care may give rise to "spillover" effects from the health of a cared-for individual to the health of carers. Spillover effects are rarely reflected in economic evaluations, in spite of growing research interest in this area, and recommendations from bodies such as the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness that effects of this type be included in cost-effectiveness analysis. OBJECTIVE We explore the positive and normative issues to which the inclusion of carer spillover effects in economic evaluation may give rise and how future research might begin to address these challenges. RESULTS Positive challenges include the identification of causal rather than coincidental impacts on carers, selection into caring, and the measurement and treatment of spillover effects. The normative issues are related to these challenges, and particularly include impacts on equity, and spillovers that improve rather than reduce the health of carers. CONCLUSIONS We argue that challenges including spillover effects in economic evaluation are considerable. Avenues for future research and possible solutions to these challenges include a re-orientation of analytic perspectives so that the impacts of caring on carers are accounted for where appropriate, and the design of studies to collect robust evidence to inform debate and guidance development in this area.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Padraig Dixon
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK; MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK.
| | - Jeff Round
- Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, England, UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Systematic Review of Public Preferences for the Allocation of Donor Organs for Transplantation: Principles of Distributive Justice. PATIENT-PATIENT CENTERED OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2019; 12:475-489. [DOI: 10.1007/s40271-019-00363-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
11
|
Herlitz A. Health, priority to the worse off, and time. MEDICINE, HEALTH CARE, AND PHILOSOPHY 2018; 21:517-527. [PMID: 29350341 PMCID: PMC6267230 DOI: 10.1007/s11019-018-9825-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/07/2023]
Abstract
It is a common view that benefits to the worse off should be given priority when health benefits are distributed. This paper addresses how to understand who is worse off in this context when individuals are differently well off at different times. The paper argues that the view that this judgment about who is worse off should be based solely on how well off individuals are when their complete lives are considered (i.e. 'the complete lives view') is implausible in this context. Instead, it is argued that a pluralistic stance toward this issue should be accepted. This pluralistic stance recognizes that also the view that only focuses on how well off individuals are now and in the future (i.e. 'the forward-looking view') is relevant. The argument is based on appeals to intuitive judgments concerning who is worse off in different cases and reference to various underlying reasons why priority to benefits to the worse off is justified.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anders Herlitz
- Department of Philosophy, Linguistics and Theory of Science, University of Gothenburg, Box 200, 405 30, Gothenburg, Sweden.
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
García-Altés A, Ruiz-Muñoz D, Colls C, Mias M, Martín Bassols N. Socioeconomic inequalities in health and the use of healthcare services in Catalonia: analysis of the individual data of 7.5 million residents. J Epidemiol Community Health 2018; 72:871-879. [PMID: 30082426 PMCID: PMC6161657 DOI: 10.1136/jech-2018-210817] [Citation(s) in RCA: 36] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/09/2018] [Revised: 07/16/2018] [Accepted: 07/18/2018] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Background The aim of this study is to analyse the health status, the use of public healthcare services and the consumption of prescription drugs in the population of Catalonia, taking into consideration the socioeconomic level of individuals and paying special attention to vulnerable groups. Methods Cross-sectional study of the entire population resident in Catalonia in 2015 (7.5 million people) using administrative records. Twenty indicators are analysed related to health, the use of healthcare services and consumption of prescription drugs. Rates, frequencies and averages are obtained for the different variables stratified by age groups (under 15 years, 15–64 years and 65 years or older), gender and socioeconomic status (calculated on the basis of pharmacy copayment levels and Social Security benefits received). Results A socioeconomic gradient was observed in all the indicators analysed, in both sexes and in all age groups. Morbidity, use of mental healthcare centres, hospitalisation rates and probability of drug consumption among children is 3–7 times higher for those with low socioeconomic level respect to those with a higher one. In children and adults, the steepest gradient was found in the use of mental health services. Moreover, there are gender inequalities. Conclusion There are significant socioeconomic inequalities in health status and in the use of healthcare services in the population of Catalonia. To respond to this situation, new policies on health and other areas, such as education and employment, are required, especially those that have an impact on early years.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Anna García-Altés
- Catalan Health System Observatory, Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS), Barcelona, Spain.,CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.,Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Dolores Ruiz-Muñoz
- Catalan Health System Observatory, Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Cristina Colls
- Catalan Health System Observatory, Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS), Barcelona, Spain
| | - Montse Mias
- Catalan Health System Observatory, Agència de Qualitat i Avaluació Sanitàries de Catalunya (AQuAS), Barcelona, Spain
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Smith WR. Legitimacy in bioethics: challenging the orthodoxy. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2018; 44:416-423. [PMID: 29431620 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2017-104559] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/03/2017] [Revised: 12/03/2017] [Accepted: 12/07/2017] [Indexed: 06/08/2023]
Abstract
Several prominent writers including Norman Daniels, James Sabin, Amy Gutmann, Dennis Thompson and Leonard Fleck advance a view of legitimacy according to which, roughly, policies are legitimate if and only if they result from democratic deliberation, which employs only public reasons that are publicised to stakeholders. Yet, the process described by this view contrasts with the actual processes involved in creating the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and in attempting to pass the Health Securities Act (HSA). Since the ACA seems to be legitimate, as the HSA would have been had it passed, there seem to be counterexamples to this view. In this essay, I clarify the concept of legitimacy as employed in bioethics discourse. I then use that clarification to develop these examples into a criticism of the orthodox view-that it implies that legitimacy requires counterintuitively large sacrifices of justice in cases where important advancement of healthcare rights depends on violations of publicity. Finally, I reply to three responses to this challenge: (1) that some revision to the orthodox view salvages its core commitments, (2) that its views of publicity and substantive considerations do not have the implications that I claim and (3) that arguments for it are strong enough to support even counterintuitive results. My arguments suggest a greater role for substantive considerations than the orthodox view allows.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- William R Smith
- School of Medicine, Emory University, Decatur, Georgia, USA
- Department of Philosophy, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
Over many years, different theories have been developed to guide the social practices and policies of institutions so that they demonstrate equal concern and respect for all, and satisfy the requirements of justice. Although the normative principles described in a theory may support just institutions, whether this results in just outcomes will depend on how the decisions that implement the principles are made and actioned. As a societal institution charged with caring for people, ensuring just outcomes is a distinct concern in healthcare. Relationships within this institution are constitutive of human flourishing and are also important to justice. Yet, it is not possible to create, maintain or evaluate interpersonal relationships in the same manner as institutions because rather than being universal and impartial, they are particular and partial. Consequently, the link between theories of justice that guide decision-making in relation to structures or institutions, and the relationships that influence those with a proximate effect on individuals, is not explicit. To address this gap, this article argues that a focus on human flourishing provides a nexus between the decision-making for just institutions and just outcomes for individuals.
Collapse
|
15
|
Cookson R, Mirelman AJ, Griffin S, Asaria M, Dawkins B, Norheim OF, Verguet S, J Culyer A. Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2017; 20:206-212. [PMID: 28237196 PMCID: PMC5340318 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.11.027] [Citation(s) in RCA: 161] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2016] [Revised: 11/09/2016] [Accepted: 11/28/2016] [Indexed: 05/22/2023]
Abstract
This articles serves as a guide to using cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to address health equity concerns. We first introduce the "equity impact plane," a tool for considering trade-offs between improving total health-the objective underpinning conventional CEA-and equity objectives, such as reducing social inequality in health or prioritizing the severely ill. Improving total health may clash with reducing social inequality in health, for example, when effective delivery of services to disadvantaged communities requires additional costs. Who gains and who loses from a cost-increasing health program depends on differences among people in terms of health risks, uptake, quality, adherence, capacity to benefit, and-crucially-who bears the opportunity costs of diverting scarce resources from other uses. We describe two main ways of using CEA to address health equity concerns: 1) equity impact analysis, which quantifies the distribution of costs and effects by equity-relevant variables, such as socioeconomic status, location, ethnicity, sex, and severity of illness; and 2) equity trade-off analysis, which quantifies trade-offs between improving total health and other equity objectives. One way to analyze equity trade-offs is to count the cost of fairer but less cost-effective options in terms of health forgone. Another method is to explore how much concern for equity is required to choose fairer but less cost-effective options using equity weights or parameters. We hope this article will help the health technology assessment community navigate the practical options now available for conducting equity-informative CEA that gives policymakers a better understanding of equity impacts and trade-offs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Susan Griffin
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
| | - Miqdad Asaria
- Centre for Health Economics, University of York, York, UK
| | - Bryony Dawkins
- Academic Unit of Health Economics, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
| | - Ole Frithjof Norheim
- Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway
| | - Stéphane Verguet
- Department of Global Health and Population, Harvard University, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
16
|
Boyd K, Hall P. Can Clinical Guidelines Afford to Ignore Cost Effectiveness? An Ethical Perspective. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2016; 34:529-531. [PMID: 26897737 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-016-0391-2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/05/2023]
|
17
|
Asthana S, Gibson A, Bailey T, Moon G, Hewson P, Dibben C. Equity of utilisation of cardiovascular care and mental health services in England: a cohort-based cross-sectional study using small-area estimation. HEALTH SERVICES AND DELIVERY RESEARCH 2016. [DOI: 10.3310/hsdr04140] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BackgroundA strong policy emphasis on the need to reduce both health inequalities and unmet need in deprived areas has resulted in the substantial redistribution of English NHS funding towards deprived areas. This raises the question of whether or not socioeconomically disadvantaged people continue to be disadvantaged in their access to and utilisation of health care.ObjectivesTo generate estimates of the prevalence of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and common mental health disorders (CMHDs) at a variety of scales, and to make these available for public use via Public Health England (PHE). To compare these estimates with utilisation of NHS services in England to establish whether inequalities of use relative to need at various stages on the health-care pathway are associated with particular sociodemographic or other factors.DesignCross-sectional analysis of practice-, primary care trust- and Clinical Commissioning Group-level variations in diagnosis, prescribing and specialist management of CVD and CMHDs relative to the estimated prevalence of those conditions (calculated using small-area estimation).ResultsThe utilisation of CVD care appears more equitable than the utilisation of care for CMHDs. In contrast to the reviewed literature, we found little evidence of underutilisation of services by older populations. Indeed, younger populations appear to be less likely to access care for some CVD conditions. Nor did deprivation emerge as a consistent predictor of lower use relative to need for either CVD or CMHDs. Ethnicity is a consistent predictor of variations in use relative to need. Rates of primary management are lower than expected in areas with higher percentages of black populations for diabetes, stroke and CMHDs. Areas with higher Asian populations have higher-than-expected rates of diabetes presentation and prescribing and lower-than-expected rates of secondary care for diabetes. For both sets of conditions, there are pronounced geographical variations in use relative to need. For instance, the North East has relatively high levels of use of cardiac care services and rural (shire) areas have low levels of use relative to need. For CMHDs, there appears to be a pronounced ‘London effect’, with the number of people registered by general practitioners as having depression, or being prescribed antidepressants, being much lower in London than expected. A total of 24 CVD and 41 CMHD prevalence estimates have been provided to PHE and will be publicly available at a range of scales, from lower- and middle-layer super output areas through to Clinical Commissioning Groups and local authorities.ConclusionsWe found little evidence of socioeconomic inequality in use for CVD and CMHDs relative to underlying need, which suggests that the strong targeting of NHS resources to deprived areas may well have addressed longstanding concerns about unmet need. However, ethnicity has emerged as a significant predictor of inequality, and there are large and unexplained geographical variations in use relative to need for both conditions which undermine the principle of equal access to health care for equal needs. The persistence of ethnic variations and the role of systematic factors (such as rurality) in shaping patterns of utilisation deserve further investigation, as does the fact that the models were far better at explaining variation in use of CVD than mental health services.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sheena Asthana
- School of Government, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Alex Gibson
- School of Government, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Trevor Bailey
- College of Mathematics and Physical Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK
| | - Graham Moon
- School of Geography and the Environment, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK
| | - Paul Hewson
- School of Computing and Mathematics, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK
| | - Chris Dibben
- School of Geosciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Gillon R. Defending the four principles approach as a good basis for good medical practice and therefore for good medical ethics. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS 2015; 41:111-116. [PMID: 25516950 DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102282] [Citation(s) in RCA: 44] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/04/2023]
Abstract
This paper argues that the four prima facie principles-beneficence, non-maleficence, respect for autonomy and justice-afford a good and widely acceptable basis for 'doing good medical ethics'. It confronts objections that the approach is simplistic, incompatible with a virtue-based approach to medicine, that it requires respect for autonomy always to have priority when the principles clash at the expense of clinical obligations to benefit patients and global justice. It agrees that the approach does not provide universalisable methods either for resolving such moral dilemmas arising from conflict between the principles or their derivatives, or universalisable methods for resolving disagreements about the scope of these principles-long acknowledged lacunae but arguably to be found, in practice, with all other approaches to medical ethics. The value of the approach, when properly understood, is to provide a universalisable though prima facie set of moral commitments which all doctors can accept, a basic moral language and a basic moral analytic framework. These can underpin an intercultural 'moral mission statement' for the goals and practice of medicine.
Collapse
|