Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35925501›Full record

ArticleThe European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care2023

Future medical and non-medical costs and their impact on the cost-effectiveness of life-prolonging interventions: a comparison of five European countries.

Hamraz Mokri, Ingelin Kvamme, Linda de Vries, Matthijs Versteegh, Pieter van Baal

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Hamraz Mokri *Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. Mokri@eshpm.eur.nl.
Ingelin Kvamme *Institute for Medical Technology Assessment(iMTA), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. kvamme@imta.eur.nl.
Linda de VriesErasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Matthijs VersteeghInstitute for Medical Technology Assessment(iMTA), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Pieter van BaalErasmus School of Health Policy and Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

Horizon 2020 research and innovation program 754936Medical Delta the prototype to payment program
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

When healthcare interventions prolong life, people consume medical and non-medical goods during the years of life they gain. It has been argued that the costs for medical consumption should be included in cost-effectiveness analyses from both a healthcare and societal perspective, and the costs for non-medical consumption should additionally be included when a societal perspective is applied. Standardized estimates of these so-called future costs are available in only a few countries and the impact of inclusion of these costs is likely to differ between countries. In this paper we present and compare future costs for five European countries and estimate the impact of including these costs on the cost-effectiveness of life-prolonging interventions. As countries differ in the availability of data, we illustrate how both individual- and aggregate-level data sources can be used to construct standardized estimates of future costs. Results show a large variation in costs between countries. The medical costs for the Netherlands, Germany, and the United Kingdom are large compared to Spain and Greece. Non-medical costs are higher in Germany, Spain, and the United Kingdom than in Greece. The impact of including future costs on the ICER similarly varied between countries, ranging from €1000 to €35,000 per QALY gained. The variation between countries in impact on the ICER is largest when considering medical costs and indicate differences in both structure and level of healthcare financing in these countries. Case study analyses were performed in which we highlight the large impact of including future costs on ICER relative to willingness-to-pay thresholds.

Indexed as

Cost-Effectiveness AnalysisCost-Benefit AnalysisEuropeGermanyHumansNetherlandsQuality-Adjusted Life YearsCost estimationEconomic evaluationFuture costsIncremental cost-effectiveness ratioMedical costNon-medical costs

Identifiers

PMID35925501
PMCPMC10198844

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.