Unrelated Future Costs and Unrelated Future Benefits: Reflections on NICE Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal

Alec Morton, Amanda I. Adler, David Bell, Andrew Briggs, Werner Brouwer, Karl Claxton, Neil Craig, Alastair Fischer, Peter McGregor and Pieter van Baal

Health Economics, 2016, vol. 25, issue 8, 933-938

Abstract: In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of ‘unrelated future costs’ (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies, and we urge future research to understand this better. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1002/hec.3366

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:hlthec:v:25:y:2016:i:8:p:933-938

Access Statistics for this article

Health Economics is currently edited by Alan Maynard, John Hutton and Andrew Jones

More articles in Health Economics from John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().