Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Incremental cost effectiveness evaluation in clinical research.

Frank Krummenauer1, I Landwehr

  • 1Clinical Epidemiology and Health Economy Unit, University Hospital for Orthopedics, Techical University of Dresden, Germany. Frank.Krummenauer@uniklinikum-dresden.de

European Journal of Medical Research
|March 2, 2005
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Validity of sample sizes in publications of randomised controlled trials on the treatment of age-related macular degeneration: cross-sectional evaluation.

BMJ open·2019
Same author

Meta-analysis of the concordance of Icare<sup>®</sup> PRO-based rebound and Goldmann applanation tonometry in glaucoma patients.

European journal of ophthalmology·2019
Same author

[Multi-disciplinary anonymous survey on a university hospital's medical doctors' knowledge of established terms and parameters in evidence-based medicine].

Deutsche medizinische Wochenschrift (1946)·2019
Same author

[Do Clinical Trial Publications in AMD Healthcare Provide Sufficient Information on the Underlying Samples' Baseline Characteristics to Enable Generalizability Considerations on the Trial Design?]

Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde·2019
Same author

Rotation of a toric intraocular lens with and without capsular tension ring: data from a multicenter non-inferiority randomized clinical trial (RCT).

BMC ophthalmology·2019
Same author

[An Illustrated Guidance for the Implementation of Methodological CONSORT Criteria in the Transparent Publication of RCTs in Ophthalmology].

Klinische Monatsblatter fur Augenheilkunde·2019

Health economic evaluations using incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental net health benefit (INHB) provide clear resource allocation rules. Both methods require pre-defining clinical benefit endpoints and willingness to pay benchmarks for effective decision-making.

Area of Science:

  • Health Economics
  • Clinical Trial Methodology
  • Decision Science

Background:

  • Health economic evaluations are increasingly vital in clinical research.
  • Clinical trialists need to integrate economic aspects, but health economic parameters are less familiar than clinical effect measures.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To illustrate and contrast incremental cost effectiveness ratios (ICERs) and incremental net health benefit (INHB) in health economic evaluations.
  • To demonstrate how these measures inform resource allocation decisions in clinical practice, using cataract surgery as a case study.

Main Methods:

  • The study explains ICERs as a ratio of costs to clinical benefit (e.g., Euros per unit of benefit).
  • It describes INHB as the net clinical benefit considering cost increases relative to a standard therapy.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Both methods are applied to the cost-effectiveness evaluation of cataract surgery with different intraocular lenses.

    • Main Results:

    • Both ICER and INHB approaches facilitate the creation of directional resource allocation rules.
    • Allocation decisions derived from both methods are consistent when a willingness to pay benchmark is predetermined.
    • Crucially, both strategies necessitate the a priori definition of the clinical benefit endpoint and the willingness to pay benchmark.

    Conclusions:

    • Incremental cost effectiveness and net health benefit estimates offer a rational basis for health economic allocation discussions and funding decisions.
    • These economic evaluations impose similar requirements on trial protocols as clinical trials, emphasizing a priori definition of primary hypotheses and clinical benefit endpoints.