Medical Hypotheses
Volume 74, Issue 2 , Pages 383-386, February 2010

Philosophical concerns regarding cost-effectiveness analyses

Weill Cornell Medical College, Chief of Spinal Surgery/Director of Academics, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Methodist Hospital, Houston, Texas 77030, USA

Received 29 June 2009; accepted 2 July 2009. published online 03 August 2009.

Summary 

Secondary to the confluence of rising health care costs and higher quality data on the effectiveness of various medical interventions, cost-effectiveness analyses are becoming increasingly common. In this paper, we aim to assess the strengths and limitations of these analyses such that their interpretation and implementation can be maximized.

The strengths of cost effectiveness analyses rest on the ‘bang-for-the-buck’ information they provide; allowing considerations of costs to be tied with therapeutic effectiveness – thereby (1) assisting in the decision making process between competing interventions for a particular disease process; and (2) between therapies to be used and diseases to be addressed via rationing. The weaknesses include (1) outcomes which depend greatly upon the methodologies used thereby confounding comparisons across studies; and (2) outcomes which, if used as the primary foundation of decision making, often conflict with societal values and desires. Accordingly, great care is suggested in interpreting the results of these studies and implementing such results in therapeutic or rationing decision making.

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0306-9877(09)00492-7

doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2009.07.003

Medical Hypotheses
Volume 74, Issue 2 , Pages 383-386, February 2010