Systematic overview of cost-effectiveness thresholds in ten countries across four continents

J Comp Eff Res. 2015 Sep;4(5):485-504. doi: 10.2217/cer.15.38.

Abstract

Aim: To provide an overview of thresholds for incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) representing willingness-to-pay (WTP) across multiple countries and insights into exemptions pertaining to the ICER (e.g., cancer). To compare ICER thresholds to individual country's estimated ability-to-pay.

Materials & methods: We included AHRQ/USA, BIQG-GOEG/Austria, CADTH/Canada, DAHTA@DIMDI/Germany, DECIT-CGATS/Brazil, HAS/France, HITAP/Thailand, IQWiG/Germany, LBI-HTA/Austria, MSAC/Australia, NICE/England/Wales and SBU/Sweden. ICER thresholds were derived from systematic literature/website search/expert surveys. WTP was compared with ATP using Spearman's rank correlation.

Results: Two general and explicitly acknowledged thresholds (England/Wales, Thailand), implicit thresholds in six countries and different ICER thresholds/decision-making rules in oncology were identified. Correlation between WTP and ability-to-pay was moderate.

Discussion: Our overview supports country-specific discussions on WTP and on how to define value(s) within societies.

Keywords: cost–effectiveness thresholds; decision-making; health policy; reimbursement; technology assessment; willingness-to-pay.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Cost-Benefit Analysis / economics*
  • Cost-Benefit Analysis / statistics & numerical data*
  • Health Expenditures / statistics & numerical data*
  • Humans
  • Internationality*
  • Quality-Adjusted Life Years