Cost Studies in Rheumatology, 2001-2002
Cost Studies in Rheumatology, 2001-2002
Economic analyses of prevention and treatment interventions in rheumatology are potentially powerful tools for evaluating many complex decisions facing clinical and public policy makers. Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analyses allow for the assessment of the trade-offs between expended resources and expected health benefits. This review describes 12 cost-effectiveness analyses done in the past year. Each relates to a different intervention for a variety of rheumatologic conditions including osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, the use of cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors, infected total joint replacements, back pain, and Lyme disease. While cost-effectiveness analyses of the use of the new biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis have been presented at national meetings, these have yet to be published. Proper use of cost-effectiveness analysis could provide valuable evidence about treatment decisions for clinical and public policy makers in rheumatology.
Because they identify the tradeoff between the resources expended on a health intervention and the health benefits that result, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA), and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) are a different breed of economic studies than those of the past. Historically, investigators focused only on determining the costs of different interventions irrespective of outcome. CEA, CUA, and CBA are important advances because instead of solely focusing on the costs, they attempt to quantify how much additional health benefit is derived from an intervention and how much more that improved health state costs society. Lately, CEA, CUA, and CBA take on particular relevance in rheumatology, as numerous new drugs and interventions have been introduced that promise powerful control of disease though at increased cost. This review further defines and identifies the key characteristics of CEA, CUA, and CBA methods. In addition, recently published (September 2001 to August 2002) CEA, CUA, and CBA studies are reviewed by disease category.
Economic analyses of prevention and treatment interventions in rheumatology are potentially powerful tools for evaluating many complex decisions facing clinical and public policy makers. Cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analyses allow for the assessment of the trade-offs between expended resources and expected health benefits. This review describes 12 cost-effectiveness analyses done in the past year. Each relates to a different intervention for a variety of rheumatologic conditions including osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, the use of cyclooxygenase-II inhibitors, infected total joint replacements, back pain, and Lyme disease. While cost-effectiveness analyses of the use of the new biologic agents in rheumatoid arthritis have been presented at national meetings, these have yet to be published. Proper use of cost-effectiveness analysis could provide valuable evidence about treatment decisions for clinical and public policy makers in rheumatology.
Because they identify the tradeoff between the resources expended on a health intervention and the health benefits that result, cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA), and cost-benefit analysis (CBA) are a different breed of economic studies than those of the past. Historically, investigators focused only on determining the costs of different interventions irrespective of outcome. CEA, CUA, and CBA are important advances because instead of solely focusing on the costs, they attempt to quantify how much additional health benefit is derived from an intervention and how much more that improved health state costs society. Lately, CEA, CUA, and CBA take on particular relevance in rheumatology, as numerous new drugs and interventions have been introduced that promise powerful control of disease though at increased cost. This review further defines and identifies the key characteristics of CEA, CUA, and CBA methods. In addition, recently published (September 2001 to August 2002) CEA, CUA, and CBA studies are reviewed by disease category.
Source...