Abstract:
Economic evaluation in health care often involves cost-utility analysis (CUA), a method based on the cost-effectiveness criterion of dollars per Quality-Adjusted Life Year (QALY), where the quality adjustement factors for years lived in ill health are established through answers to standard-gamble questions. This paper shows that, contrary to a widely held notion, allocation of a fixed health care budget through CUA does not generally result in a second-best efficient allocation. However, CUA can be used to attain second-best efficiency in the sense of meeting a given QALY target at minimum social cost. It also qualifies Meltzer's (1997) result that the cost per QALY for life-saving medical interventions should include the future consumption of those who would otherwise not have survived, by showing that its validity depends on how the QALY index has been defined. Another finding is that failure to specify carefully what respondents to standard gamble question are supposed to assume about the financial consequences of ill health may result in a bias against providing care to older individuals.
Ordering information: This working paper can be ordered from http://www.ssc.uwo.c ... mittingordering.html The price is Paper copy available by mail at a cost of $10.00 Canadian each.
More papers in UWO Department of Economics Working Papers from University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics Address: Department of Economics, Reference Centre, Social Science Centre, University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5C2 Series data maintained by ().
This site is part of RePEc
and all the data displayed here is part of the RePEc data set.
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to
contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .