Skip to main content
Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics 1/2003

01.01.2003 | Review Article

Advantages of Using the Net-Benefit Approach for Analysing Uncertainty in Economic Evaluation Studies

verfasst von: Dr Niklas Zethraeus, Magnus Johannesson, Bengt Jönsson, Mickael Löthgren, Magnus Tambour

Erschienen in: PharmacoEconomics | Ausgabe 1/2003

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

No consensus has yet been reached on how to analyse uncertainty in economic evaluation studies where individual patient data are available for costs and health effects. This paper summarises the available results regarding the analysis of uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane and argues for using the net-benefit approach when analysing uncertainty in cost-effectiveness studies. The net-benefit approach avoids the interpretation and statistical problems related to the incremental cost effectiveness ratio and implies several advantages. First, traditional statistical methods can be used for confidence-interval estimation and hypothesis testing. Second, calculation of the optimal sample size and the power of the study are facilitated allowing the correlation between costs and effects to vary within and between patient groups. Third, the use of a Bayesian approach to cost-effectiveness analysis is facilitated. Fourth, a formal relation between cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and statistical inference is provided. Finally, the net-benefit approach gives the Fieller’s limits of the confidence interval for the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio in the cost-effectiveness plane. Based on these advantages the net-benefit approach should strongly be considered when analysing uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analyses.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Briggs A, Fenn P. Confidence intervals or surfaces? Uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane. Health Econ 1998; 7 (8): 723–40CrossRef Briggs A, Fenn P. Confidence intervals or surfaces? Uncertainty on the cost-effectiveness plane. Health Econ 1998; 7 (8): 723–40CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Willan AR, O’Brien BJ. Sample size and power issues in estimating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials data. Health Econ 1999; 8: 203–11CrossRef Willan AR, O’Brien BJ. Sample size and power issues in estimating incremental cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials data. Health Econ 1999; 8: 203–11CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Briggs A, Gray AM. Power and sample size calculations for stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 81–92CrossRef Briggs A, Gray AM. Power and sample size calculations for stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 81–92CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Stinnett A, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 68–80CrossRef Stinnett A, Mullahy J. Net health benefits: a new framework for the analysis of uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 68–80CrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Van Hout BA, Al MJ, Gordon GS, et al. Costs, effects and C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994; 3: 309–19CrossRef Van Hout BA, Al MJ, Gordon GS, et al. Costs, effects and C/E-ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health Econ 1994; 3: 309–19CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Wakker P, Klaassen M. Confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios. Health Econ 1995; 4: 373–81CrossRef Wakker P, Klaassen M. Confidence intervals for cost-effectiveness ratios. Health Econ 1995; 4: 373–81CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Heitjan DF, Moskowitz AJ, Whang W. Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials. Health Econ 1999; 8: 191–201CrossRef Heitjan DF, Moskowitz AJ, Whang W. Bayesian estimation of cost-effectiveness ratios from clinical trials. Health Econ 1999; 8: 191–201CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Jönsson B, Wahlqvist P. Management of NSAID-associated lesions: a cost-effectiveness perspective. Am J Med 1997; 104: 81–8CrossRef Jönsson B, Wahlqvist P. Management of NSAID-associated lesions: a cost-effectiveness perspective. Am J Med 1997; 104: 81–8CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Tambour M, Zethraeus N, Johannesson M. A note on confidence intervals in cost-effectiveness analysis. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1998; 14 (3): 467–71CrossRef Tambour M, Zethraeus N, Johannesson M. A note on confidence intervals in cost-effectiveness analysis. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1998; 14 (3): 467–71CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Willan AR, Lin DY. Incremental net benefit in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 2001; 20: 1563–74CrossRef Willan AR, Lin DY. Incremental net benefit in randomized clinical trials. Stat Med 2001; 20: 1563–74CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Willan AR. Analysis, sample size, and power for estimating incremental net health benefit from clinical trial data. Control Clin Trials 2001; 22: 228–37CrossRef Willan AR. Analysis, sample size, and power for estimating incremental net health benefit from clinical trial data. Control Clin Trials 2001; 22: 228–37CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Löthgren M, Zethraeus N. Definition, interpretation and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2000; 9: 623–30CrossRef Löthgren M, Zethraeus N. Definition, interpretation and calculation of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ 2000; 9: 623–30CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Zethraeus N, Löthgren M. On the equivalence of the net benefit and the Fieller’s methods for statistical inference in cost-effectiveness analysis. Working paper no. 379, 2000. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics, 2000 Zethraeus N, Löthgren M. On the equivalence of the net benefit and the Fieller’s methods for statistical inference in cost-effectiveness analysis. Working paper no. 379, 2000. SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Economics and Finance. Stockholm: Stockholm School of Economics, 2000
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Heitjan DF. Fieller’s method and net health benefits. Health Econ 2000; 9: 327–35CrossRef Heitjan DF. Fieller’s method and net health benefits. Health Econ 2000; 9: 327–35CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Stinnett AA. Adjusting for bias in c/e ratio estimates. Health Econ 1996; 5: 470–2CrossRef Stinnett AA. Adjusting for bias in c/e ratio estimates. Health Econ 1996; 5: 470–2CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Laska EM, Meisner M, Siegel C. Power and sample size in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19: 339–43CrossRef Laska EM, Meisner M, Siegel C. Power and sample size in cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19: 339–43CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Stinnett AA. Is it really so bad to be unambiguously inefficient? The role of dominance in stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19: 102–3CrossRef Stinnett AA. Is it really so bad to be unambiguously inefficient? The role of dominance in stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Med Decis Making 1999; 19: 102–3CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Raikou K, Gray A, Briggs A, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of improved bloodpressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40. BMJ 1998; 317: 720–6CrossRef Raikou K, Gray A, Briggs A, et al. Cost effectiveness analysis of improved bloodpressure control in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes: UKPDS 40. BMJ 1998; 317: 720–6CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Gray A, Raikou M, McGuire A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of an intensive blood glucose control policy in patients with type 2 diabetes: economic analysis alongside randomised controlled trial: UKPDS 41. BMJ 2000; 320: 1373–8CrossRef Gray A, Raikou M, McGuire A, et al. Cost-effectiveness of an intensive blood glucose control policy in patients with type 2 diabetes: economic analysis alongside randomised controlled trial: UKPDS 41. BMJ 2000; 320: 1373–8CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Briggs A. A Bayesian approach to stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 1999; 8: 257–61CrossRef Briggs A. A Bayesian approach to stochastic cost-effectiveness analysis. Health Econ 1999; 8: 257–61CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat O’Hagan A, Stevens JW, Montmartin J. Inference for the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve and cost-effectiveness ratio. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17 (4): 339–49CrossRef O’Hagan A, Stevens JW, Montmartin J. Inference for the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve and cost-effectiveness ratio. Pharmacoeconomics 2000; 17 (4): 339–49CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Briggs A, Tambour M. The design and analysis of stochastic cost-effectiveness studies for the evaluation of health care interventions. Drug Information J 2001; 35; 1455–68CrossRef Briggs A, Tambour M. The design and analysis of stochastic cost-effectiveness studies for the evaluation of health care interventions. Drug Information J 2001; 35; 1455–68CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999; 18: 341–64CrossRef Claxton K. The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies. J Health Econ 1999; 18: 341–64CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Claxton K. Bayesian approaches to the value of information: implications for the regulation of new pharmaceuticals. Health Econ 1999; 8: 269–74CrossRef Claxton K. Bayesian approaches to the value of information: implications for the regulation of new pharmaceuticals. Health Econ 1999; 8: 269–74CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Obenchain RL, Melfi CA, Croghan TW, et al. Bootstrap analyses of cost effectiveness in antidepressant pharmacotherapy. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (5): 464–72CrossRef Obenchain RL, Melfi CA, Croghan TW, et al. Bootstrap analyses of cost effectiveness in antidepressant pharmacotherapy. Pharmacoeconomics 1997; 11 (5): 464–72CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Jönsson B, Cook JR, Pedersen TR. The cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering in patients with diabetes: results from 4S trial. Diabetologia 1999; 42: 1293–301CrossRef Jönsson B, Cook JR, Pedersen TR. The cost-effectiveness of lipid lowering in patients with diabetes: results from 4S trial. Diabetologia 1999; 42: 1293–301CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Hunink MG, Bult JR, de Vries J, et al. Uncertainty in decision models analyzing cost-effectiveness: the joint distribution of incremental costs and effectiveness evaluated with a nonparametric bootstrap method. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 337–46CrossRef Hunink MG, Bult JR, de Vries J, et al. Uncertainty in decision models analyzing cost-effectiveness: the joint distribution of incremental costs and effectiveness evaluated with a nonparametric bootstrap method. Med Decis Making 1998; 18: 337–46CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Halpern EF, Weinstein MC, Hunink MGM, et al. Representing both first- and second-order uncertainties by monte carlo simulation for groups of patients. Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 314–22CrossRef Halpern EF, Weinstein MC, Hunink MGM, et al. Representing both first- and second-order uncertainties by monte carlo simulation for groups of patients. Med Decis Making 2000; 20: 314–22CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Advantages of Using the Net-Benefit Approach for Analysing Uncertainty in Economic Evaluation Studies
verfasst von
Dr Niklas Zethraeus
Magnus Johannesson
Bengt Jönsson
Mickael Löthgren
Magnus Tambour
Publikationsdatum
01.01.2003
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
PharmacoEconomics / Ausgabe 1/2003
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200321010-00003

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2003

PharmacoEconomics 1/2003 Zur Ausgabe

Current Opinion

Generic Clozapine