Is the Choice of Cost-Effectiveness Threshold in Cost-Utility Analysis Endogenous to the Resulting Value of Technology? A Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Cost-utility analysis (CUA) is widely used for health technology assessment; however, concerns exist that cost-utility analysts may suggest higher cost-effectiveness thresholds (CETs) to compensate for technologies of relatively lower value.

Objective

We explored whether selection of a CUA study's CET was endogenous to estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs).

Methods

We systematically reviewed the US cost-effectiveness literature between 2000 and 2017 where studies with explicit CET and ICERs were included. We classified the ratio of studies hypothesized to analyze cost-effective technologies at low CETs (i.e., less than $100,000/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY]) vs higher CETs (i.e., $100,000-$150,000/QALY) relative to their ICER, using a

SUBMITTER: Padula WV 

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10896216 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature