IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v12y2014i5p471-476.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ethical Objections Against Including Life-Extension Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Consistent Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Afschin Gandjour
  • Dirk Müller

Abstract

One of the major ethical concerns regarding cost-effectiveness analysis in health care has been the inclusion of life-extension costs (“it is cheaper to let people die”). For this reason, many analysts have opted to rule out life-extension costs from the analysis. However, surprisingly little has been written in the health economics literature regarding this ethical concern and the resulting practice. The purpose of this work was to present a framework and potential solution for ethical objections against life-extension costs. This work found three levels of ethical concern: (i) with respect to all life-extension costs (disease-related and -unrelated); (ii) with respect to disease-unrelated costs only; and (iii) regarding disease-unrelated costs plus disease-related costs not influenced by the intervention. Excluding all life-extension costs for ethical reasons would require—for reasons of consistency—a simultaneous exclusion of savings from reducing morbidity. At the other extreme, excluding only disease-unrelated life-extension costs for ethical reasons would require—again for reasons of consistency—the exclusion of health gains due to treatment of unrelated diseases. Therefore, addressing ethical concerns regarding the inclusion of life-extension costs necessitates fundamental changes in the calculation of cost effectiveness. Copyright Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Afschin Gandjour & Dirk Müller, 2014. "Ethical Objections Against Including Life-Extension Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: A Consistent Approach," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 471-476, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:12:y:2014:i:5:p:471-476
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-014-0112-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40258-014-0112-y
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-014-0112-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Afschin Gandjour, 2006. "Consumption costs and earnings during added years of life ‐ a reply to Nyman," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 315-317, March.
    2. Pieter H. M. van Baal & Talitha L. Feenstra & Rudolf T. Hoogenveen & G. Ardine de Wit & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2007. "Unrelated medical care in life years gained and the cost utility of primary prevention: in search of a ‘perfect’ cost–utility ratio," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(4), pages 421-433, April.
    3. Bengt Liljas & Göran S. Karlsson & Nils‐Olov Stålhammar, 2008. "On future non‐medical costs in economic evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 579-591, May.
    4. John A. Nyman, 2004. "Should the consumption of survivors be included as a cost in cost–utility analysis?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(5), pages 417-427, May.
    5. Jeffrey R. J. Richardson & Jan Abel Olsen, 2006. "In defence of societal sovereignty: a comment on Nyman ‘the inclusion of survivor consumption in CUA’," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(3), pages 311-313, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dankó, D. & Blay, J-Y. & Garrison, L.P., 2019. "Challenges in the value assessment, pricing and funding of targeted combination therapies in oncology," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(12), pages 1230-1236.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. John A. Nyman, 2011. "Measurement of QALYS and the welfare implications of survivor consumption and leisure forgone," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 56-67, January.
    2. Bengt Liljas, 2010. "On the welfare theoretic foundation of cost-effectiveness analysis—the case when survival is not affected," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(1), pages 5-13, February.
    3. Bengt Liljas, 2011. "Welfare, QALYs, and costs – a comment," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(1), pages 68-72, January.
    4. Linda M. Vries & Pieter H. M. Baal & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2019. "Future Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses: Past, Present, Future," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 37(2), pages 119-130, February.
    5. Erik Nord & Christoffer Lamøy, 2018. "Including Future Consumption and Production in Economic Evaluation of Interventions that Save Life-Years: Commentary," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 357-358, December.
    6. Douglas Lundin & Joakim Ramsberg, 2008. "On survival consumption costs – a reply to Nyman," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(2), pages 293-297, February.
    7. Pieter H. M. van Baal & Talitha L. Feenstra & Johan J. Polder & Rudolf T. Hoogenveen & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2011. "Economic evaluation and the postponement of health care costs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 20(4), pages 432-445, April.
    8. Alec Morton & Amanda I. Adler & David Bell & Andrew Briggs & Werner Brouwer & Karl Claxton & Neil Craig & Alastair Fischer & Peter McGregor & Pieter van Baal, 2016. "Unrelated Future Costs and Unrelated Future Benefits: Reflections on NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(8), pages 933-938, August.
    9. Liqun Liu & Andrew J. Rettenmaier & Thomas R. Saving, 2012. "Endogenous Patient Responses and the Consistency Principle in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(3), pages 488-497, May.
    10. Marie Kruse & Jan Sørensen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2012. "Future costs in cost-effectiveness analysis: an empirical assessment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(1), pages 63-70, February.
    11. Charles Christian Adarkwah & Amirhossein Sadoghi & Afschin Gandjour, 2016. "Should Cost‐Effectiveness Analysis Include the Cost of Consumption Activities? AN Empirical Investigation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(2), pages 249-256, February.
    12. Dieter Tscheulin & Florian Drevs, 2010. "The relevance of unrelated costs internal and external to the healthcare sector to the outcome of a cost-comparison analysis of secondary prevention: the case of general colorectal cancer screening in," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(2), pages 141-150, April.
    13. Matthijs Versteegh & Saskia Knies & Werner Brouwer, 2016. "From Good to Better: New Dutch Guidelines for Economic Evaluations in Healthcare," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(11), pages 1071-1074, November.
    14. Bengt Liljas & Göran S. Karlsson & Nils‐Olov Stålhammar, 2008. "On future non‐medical costs in economic evaluations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(5), pages 579-591, May.
    15. Kellerborg, Klas & Wouterse, Bram & Brouwer, Werner & van Baal, Pieter, 2021. "Estimating the costs of non-medical consumption in life-years gained for economic evaluations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 289(C).
    16. Pieter H. M. van Baal & Talitha L. Feenstra & Rudolf T. Hoogenveen & G. Ardine de Wit & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2007. "Unrelated medical care in life years gained and the cost utility of primary prevention: in search of a ‘perfect’ cost–utility ratio," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(4), pages 421-433, April.
    17. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    18. Liqun Liu & Andrew J. Rettenmaier & Thomas R. Saving, 2008. "Longevity bias in cost‐effectiveness analysis," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(4), pages 523-534, April.
    19. Dirk Müller & Marion Danner & Rita Schmutzler & Christoph Engel & Kirsten Wassermann & Björn Stollenwerk & Stephanie Stock & Kerstin Rhiem, 2019. "Economic modeling of risk-adapted screen-and-treat strategies in women at high risk for breast or ovarian cancer," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 739-750, July.
    20. Afschin Gandjour, 2009. "Aging diseases – do they prevent preventive health care from saving costs?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 355-362, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:12:y:2014:i:5:p:471-476. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.