Principles of Economic Evaluation and Their Application to Informatics

This chapter summarizes the main techniques used in economic evaluation, with examples drawn from health and biomedical informatics. It describes basic methods for assessing costs and benefits, including quality of life, then distinguishes the five subtypes of economic studies (cost minimizing, cost consequence, cost benefit, cost utility, and cost effectiveness) and describes the purpose and interpretation of sensitivity analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Buy Now

eBook EUR 50.28 Price includes VAT (France)

Softcover Book EUR 63.29 Price includes VAT (France)

Hardcover Book EUR 84.39 Price includes VAT (France)

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

References

• Doubilet P, Weinstein MC, McNeil BJ. Use and misuse of the term “cost-effective” in medicine. N Engl J Med. 1986;314:253–6. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• Drummond MF, O’Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the evaluation of health care programmes. 2nd ed. Oxford, UK: Oxford Medical Publications; 1997a. Google Scholar
• Drummond MF, Richardson WS, O’Brien BJ, Levine M, Heyland D. Users’ guides to the medical literature XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice A. Are the results of the study valid?. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1997b;277:1552–7. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• Evans RS, Pestotnik SL, Classen DC, Clemmer TP, Weaver LK, Orme JF Jr, et al. A computer-assisted management program for antibiotics and other antiinfective agents. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:232–8. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• Feeny D, Furlong W, Torrance GW, Goldsmith CH, Zhu Z, DePauw S, et al. Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system. Med Care. 2002;40:113–28. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Finkler SA. The distinction between costs and charges. Ann Intern Med. 1982;96:102–9. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• Ghani Z, Jarl J, Sanmartin Berglund J, Andersson M, Anderberg P. The cost-effectiveness of mobile health (mHealth) interventions for older adults: systematic review. Int J Environ Res Pub Health. 2020;17:5290. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Gold MR, Siegel JE, Russel LB, Weinstein MC. Cost effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press; 1996. Google Scholar
• Jacob V, Thota AB, Chattopadhyay SK, Njie GJ, Proia KK, Hopkins DP, et al. Cost and economic benefit of clinical decision support systems for cardiovascular disease prevention: a community guide systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2017;24:669–676. Available from https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocw160. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• Keeler EB, Cretin S. Discounting of life-saving and other nonmonetary effects. Manag Sci. 1983;29:300–6. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Kumar P, Sundermann AJ, Martin EM, Snyder GM, Marsh JW, Harrison LH, et al. Method for economic evaluation of bacterial whole genome sequencing surveillance compared to standard of care in detecting hospital outbreaks. Clin Infect Dis 2021;73:e9–e18. Available from https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa512. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• Lara-Munoz C, Feinstein AR. How should quality of life be measured? J Investig Med. 1999;47:17–24. CASPubMedGoogle Scholar
• Murphie P, Little S, McKinstry B, Pinnock H. Remote consulting with telemonitoring of continuous positive airway pressure usage data for the routine review of people with obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome: a systematic review. J Telemed Telecare. 2019;25:17–25. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• O’Brien BJ, Heyland D, Richardson WS, Levine M, Drummond MF. Users’ guides to the medical literature XIII. How to use an article on economic analysis of clinical practice B. What are the results and will they help me in caring for my patients?. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. JAMA. 1997;277:1802–6. ArticleGoogle Scholar
• Sadoughi F, Nasiri S, Ahmadi H. The impact of health information exchange on healthcare quality and cost-effectiveness: a systematic literature review. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2018;161:209–232. Available from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2018.04.023. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• Sanders GD, Neumann PJ, Basu A, Brock DW, Feeny D, Krahn M, et al. Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA 2016;316:1093–1103. Available from https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2016.12195. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• Torrance GW, Feeny D. Utilities and quality-adjusted life years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1989;5:559–75. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• Udvarhelyi IS, Colditz GA, Rai A, Epstein AM. Cost-effectiveness and cost-benefit analyses in the medical literature: are the methods being used correctly? Ann Intern Med. 1992;116:238–44. ArticleCASGoogle Scholar
• United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Medical Technologies Guidance (MTG27): virtual touch quantification to diagnose and monitor liver fibrosis in chronic Hepatitis B and C. London: United Kingdom National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE); 2020. Available from https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/mtg27. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Economic News Release: Consumer Price Index (CPI). Washington, DC: Division of Consumer Prices and Price Indexes, United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), United States Department of Labor (DOL); 2021. Available from https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.toc.htm. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). The National Health Expenditure Accounts (NHEA): Historical Data. Baltimore, MD: United States Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS); 2021. Available from https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/NationalHealthAccountsHistorical#:~:text=U.S.%20health%20care%20spending%20grew,spending%20accounted%20for%2017.7%20percent. Accessed 3 July 2021.
• Wang SJ, Middleton B, Prosser LA, Bardon CG, Spurr CD, Carchidi PJ, et al. A cost-benefit analysis of electronic medical records in primary care. Am J Med. 2003;114:397–403. ArticleGoogle Scholar

Acknowledgments

This chapter is closely based on a longer chapter from the second edition of this book written by Professor Mark Roberts of the University of Pittsburgh. The authors would like to sincerely acknowledge Professor Roberts’ significant contribution to this new version.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

1. Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI, USA Charles P. Friedman
2. Department of Primary Care, Population Sciences and Medical Education, School of Medicine, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK Jeremy C. Wyatt
3. Department of Medical Informatics and Clinical Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, USA Joan S. Ash

1. Charles P. Friedman