Suppr超能文献

从社会角度看医疗保健中的成本效益分析与成本效果分析。

Cost-Benefit Analysis versus Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from a Societal Perspective in Healthcare.

机构信息

Department of Economics, Fordham University, Bronx, NY 10458, USA.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 6;20(5):4637. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20054637.

Abstract

Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is the main way that economic evaluations are carried out in the health care field. However, CEA has limited validity in deciding whether any health care evaluation is socially worthwhile and hence justifies funding. Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA) is the economic evaluation method that should be used to help decide what to invest in when the objective is to record the impact on everyone in society. Cost-utility analysis (CUA), which has its roots in CEA, can be converted into CBA under certain circumstances that are not general. In this article, the strengths and weaknesses of CEA relative to CBA are analyzed in stages, starting in its most classical form and then proceeding via CUA to end up as CBA. The analysis takes place mainly in the context of five actual dementia interventions that have already been found to pass a CBA test. The CBA data is recast into CEA and CUA terms in tabular form in order that the contrast been CEA and CBA is most transparent. We find that how much of the fixed budget that is used up to fund other alternatives determines how much is left over to fund the particular intervention one is evaluating.

摘要

成本效益分析(CEA)是医疗保健领域进行经济评估的主要方法。然而,CEA 在决定任何医疗保健评估是否具有社会价值并因此值得资助方面的有效性有限。成本效益分析(CBA)是应使用的经济评估方法,以帮助确定在目标是记录对社会每个人的影响时应该投资什么。成本效用分析(CUA)是 CEA 的基础,在某些情况下可以转换为 CBA,但并不普遍。在本文中,分阶段分析了 CEA 相对于 CBA 的优缺点,从其最经典的形式开始,然后通过 CUA 最终转化为 CBA。分析主要在已经通过 CBA 测试的五个实际痴呆症干预措施的背景下进行。将 CBA 数据以表格形式改写为 CEA 和 CUA 术语,以便最透明地对比 CEA 和 CBA。我们发现,用于资助其他替代方案的固定预算中有多少被用完,这决定了用于评估特定干预措施的剩余资金量。

相似文献

1
Cost-Benefit Analysis versus Cost-Effectiveness Analysis from a Societal Perspective in Healthcare.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 6;20(5):4637. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20054637.
2
Discounting in cost-utility analysis of healthcare interventions: reassessing current practice.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2003;21(2):75-87. doi: 10.2165/00019053-200321020-00001.
3
The cost-effectiveness of public health interventions examined by NICE from 2011 to 2016.
J Public Health (Oxf). 2018 Sep 1;40(3):557-566. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdx119.
4
Economic evaluations in fracture research an introduction with examples of foot fractures.
Injury. 2022 Mar;53(3):895-903. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2022.01.013. Epub 2022 Jan 10.
5
6
The impact of economic evaluation on quality management in spine surgery.
Eur Spine J. 2009 Aug;18 Suppl 3(Suppl 3):338-47. doi: 10.1007/s00586-009-0939-3. Epub 2009 Apr 1.
7
Valuing the Clinical Effectiveness of Therapeutics.
J Evid Based Dent Pract. 2016 Jun;16(2):86-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2016.01.001. Epub 2016 Jan 12.

引用本文的文献

1
Public Preferences Regarding Equitable Healthcare Rationing Across Gender Identities in China.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2025 Aug 4;22(8):1218. doi: 10.3390/ijerph22081218.
2
Cost minimization analysis of digital-first healthcare pathways in primary care.
NPJ Digit Med. 2025 Aug 25;8(1):546. doi: 10.1038/s41746-025-01937-z.
3
Enhancing urban quality of life evaluation using spatial multi criteria analysis.
Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 1;15(1):22048. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-05468-1.
5
Assessing the costs and savings of telemedicine: Insights from the consolidated framework for implementation research.
Digit Health. 2025 Jan 29;11:20552076251314552. doi: 10.1177/20552076251314552. eCollection 2025 Jan-Dec.
6
Leveraging digital tools to enhance diversity and inclusion in clinical trial recruitment.
Front Public Health. 2024 Oct 28;12:1483367. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1483367. eCollection 2024.
7
The Knowledge and Application of Economics in Healthcare in a High-Income Country Today: The Case of Belgium.
J Mark Access Health Policy. 2024 Sep 4;12(3):264-279. doi: 10.3390/jmahp12030021. eCollection 2024 Sep.
9
Imaging and Metabolic Diagnostic Methods in the Stage Assessment of Rectal Cancer.
Cancers (Basel). 2024 Jul 16;16(14):2553. doi: 10.3390/cancers16142553.
10
Assessing quality of life in pulmonary arterial hypertension: An independent prognostic marker.
Pulm Circ. 2024 Jun 2;14(2):e12380. doi: 10.1002/pul2.12380. eCollection 2024 Apr.

本文引用的文献

2
Family and Caregiver Spillover Effects in Cost-Utility Analyses of Alzheimer's Disease Interventions.
Pharmacoeconomics. 2019 Apr;37(4):597-608. doi: 10.1007/s40273-019-00788-3.
4
Updating cost-effectiveness--the curious resilience of the $50,000-per-QALY threshold.
N Engl J Med. 2014 Aug 28;371(9):796-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1405158.
6
Greater risk of dementia when spouse has dementia? The Cache County study.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2010 May;58(5):895-900. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2010.02806.x.
7
Cost-effectiveness of HIV/AIDS interventions in Africa: a systematic review of the evidence.
Lancet. 2002 May 11;359(9318):1635-43. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08595-1.
8
Clinical dementia rating: a reliable and valid diagnostic and staging measure for dementia of the Alzheimer type.
Int Psychogeriatr. 1997;9 Suppl 1:173-6; discussion 177-8. doi: 10.1017/s1041610297004870.
9
Some guidelines on the use of cost effectiveness league tables.
BMJ. 1993 Feb 27;306(6877):570-2. doi: 10.1136/bmj.306.6877.570.
10
The relationship between cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-benefit analysis.
Soc Sci Med. 1995 Aug;41(4):483-9. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)00353-u.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验