On what basis are medical cost-effectiveness thresholds set? Clashing opinions and an absence of data: a systematic review

Abstract

Background: The amount a government should be willing to invest in adopting new medical treatments has long been under debate. With many countries using formal cost-effectiveness (C/E) thresholds when examining potential new treatments and ever-growing medical costs, accurately setting the level of a C/E threshold can be essential for an efficient healthcare system. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review is to describe the prominent approaches to setting a C/E threshold, compile available national-level C/E threshold data and willingness-to-pay (WTP) data, and to discern whether associations exist between these values, gross domestic product (GDP) and health-adjusted life expectancy (HALE). This review further examines current obstacles faced with the presently available data. Methods: A systematic review was performed to collect articles which have studied national C/E thresholds and willingness-to-pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in the general population. Associations between GDP, HALE, WTP, and C/E thresholds were analyzed with correlations. Results: Seventeen countries were identified from nine unique sources to have formal C/E thresholds within our inclusion criteria. Thirteen countries from nine sources were identified to have WTP per QALY data within our inclusion criteria. Two possible associations were identified: C/E thresholds with HALE (quadratic correlation of 0.63), and C/E thresholds with GDP per capita (polynomial correlation of 0.84). However, these results are based on few observations and therefore firm conclusions cannot be made. Conclusions: Most national C/E thresholds identified in our review fall within the WHO’s recommended range of one-to-three times GDP per capita. However, the quality and quantity of data available regarding national average WTP per QALY, opportunity costs, and C/E thresholds is poor in comparison to the importance of adequate investment in healthcare. There exists an obvious risk that countries might either over- or underinvest in healthcare if they base their decision-making process on erroneous presumptions or non-evidence-based methodologies. The commonly referred to value of 100,000$ USD per QALY may potentially have some basis.

Cost-Utility Analysis of Imaging for Surveillance and Diagnosis of Hepatocellular Carcinoma

“…This WTP threshold may vary depending on the intervention and the place where the analysis is being performed. Most national thresholds fall within the World Health Organization's recommended range of one-to-three times the per capita gross domestic product (GDP) [138].…”

Implementation of Health Technology Assessment in the Middle East and North Africa: Comparison Between the Current and Preferred Status

“…Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios may be compared to the economic status of countries, which was initially applied in the WHO-CHOICE project (Hutubessy et al, 2003). Although WHO does not recommend this practice anymore (Garner et al, 2018), GDP per capita is still the most frequently applied cost-effectiveness threshold (Cameron et al, 2018). Respondents with percentage of 70% reported no thresholds in their countries.…”

Reflecting the Health Opportunity Costs of Funding Decisions Within Value Frameworks: Initial Estimates and the Need for Further Research

“…Cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted or quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained (2015 US$). 24 The same estimates are presented against under-5 mortality in Supplemental Appendix B (see the online version at doi:10.1016/j.clinthera.2019.12. 002).…”