Contingent valuation of eight new treatments: What is the clinician's and politician's willingness to pay?

16Citations
Citations of this article
24Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To assess the willingness to pay (WTP) for eight new treatments from a life-long perspective. Methods: A contingent valuation with virtual examples and dichotomous choice questions is circulated to Finnish clinicians (N 146) and politicians (N 73). Costs and utilities (15D, EQ-5D) are obtained from Finnish sources, and the health care payer perspective is assumed. Health benefits are measured using life-years gained (LYG) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) gained, and 3% and 0% annual discounting is done. The results are presented as different WTP thresholds (incremental and aggregate cost-effectiveness ratios, and incremental investments, II). Heterogeneity is handled using conditional (Hurdle) modeling. Results: In 1,092 decisions, the mean discounted (undiscounted) incremental WTP/QALY gained is €102,616 (€78,686) and €94,770 (€77,856) measured with 15D and EQ-5D, respectively. The mean discounted (undiscounted) incremental WTP/LYG is €66,277 (€58,160). The highest incremental WTPs are reported for cancer (€205,994-250,509/QALY gained) and lowest for metabolic disease (€23,492-43,398/QALY gained) treatment. The discounted (undiscounted) IIs to health care are €83,886 (€85,398) Euros; metabolic presenting the highest (€199,499-213,808) and coronary heart disease treatment (€36,124-36,736) the lowest value for the lifetime of the patient. WTP is dependent upon disease/treatment, patient's age, time preference, health benefit type and discounting. Minor differences between clinicians and politicians are observed. Conclusion: WTP vary for different diseases and is not explained by incremental costs. Thus, a single WTP for all treatments/diseases hypothesis do not gain empirical support -WTP is better explained by treatment and patient/disease characteristics. Cost-effectiveness and II have a trade-off, which encourages studies including both efficiency and affordability. © Soini et al.; Licensee Bentham Open.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Soini, E. J., Kukkonen, J., Myllykangas, M., & Ryynänen, O. P. (2012). Contingent valuation of eight new treatments: What is the clinician’s and politician’s willingness to pay? Open Complementary Medicine Journal, 4, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.2174/1876391X01204010001

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free