The Influence of Cost-Effectiveness and Other Factors on Nice Decisions
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) emphasises that cost‐effectiveness is not the only consideration in health technology appraisal and is increasingly explicit about other factors considered relevant but not the weight attached to each. The objective of this study is to inv...
Saved in:
Published in: | Health economics Vol. 24; no. 10; pp. 1256 - 1271 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
England
Blackwell Publishing Ltd
01-10-2015
Wiley Periodicals Inc |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) emphasises that cost‐effectiveness is not the only consideration in health technology appraisal and is increasingly explicit about other factors considered relevant but not the weight attached to each.
The objective of this study is to investigate the influence of cost‐effectiveness and other factors on NICE decisions and whether NICE's decision‐making has changed over time.
We model NICE's decisions as binary choices for or against a health care technology in a specific patient group. Independent variables comprised of the following: clinical and economic evidence; characteristics of patients, disease or treatment; and contextual factors potentially affecting decision‐making. Data on all NICE decisions published by December 2011 were obtained from HTAinSite [www.htainsite.com].
Cost‐effectiveness alone correctly predicted 82% of decisions; few other variables were significant and alternative model specifications had similar performance. There was no evidence that the threshold has changed significantly over time. The model with highest prediction accuracy suggested that technologies costing £40 000 per quality‐adjusted life‐year (QALY) have a 50% chance of NICE rejection (75% at £52 000/QALY; 25% at £27 000/QALY).
Past NICE decisions appear to have been based on a higher threshold than £20 000–£30 000/QALY. However, this may reflect consideration of other factors that cannot be easily quantified. © 2014 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | Supporting info item istex:8F66FE52561284D7237F3EAAB5694D0A6B199B3C ArticleID:HEC3086 ark:/67375/WNG-33BPTGPN-1 ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
ISSN: | 1057-9230 1099-1050 |
DOI: | 10.1002/hec.3086 |