Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 27, 2026

E-Patient Counseling Trial (E-PACO): Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Endogenous patient responses and the consistency principle in cost-effectiveness analysis
Liqun Liu1, Andrew J Rettenmaier1, Thomas R Saving1
1Texas A&M University, College Station, TX (LL, AJR, TRS)
Insights
This study clarifies the consistency principle in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). Including or excluding costs and benefits of patient responses does not change CEA results, but including survival consumption and earnings is recommended.
Area of Science:
- Health Economics
- Medical Decision Making
- Pharmacoeconomics
Background:
- Medical interventions have direct costs and health benefits, but also indirect financial and health impacts.
- Determining which costs and benefits to include in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) is crucial.
- The consistency principle mandates including or excluding both costs and utility benefits of a change.
Purpose of the Study:
- To address the consistency principle in CEA by distinguishing exogenous and endogenous changes.
- To determine how to choose between exclusion/inclusion rules for CEA.
- To clarify the treatment of consumption costs and earnings in CEA.
Main Methods:
- Distinguishing exogenous (intervention-driven) and endogenous (patient response) changes.
- Utilizing a lifetime utility maximization framework.
- Analyzing the impact of inclusion/exclusion rules on CEA outcomes.
Main Results:
- Excluding or including both costs and utility benefits of endogenous changes does not affect CEA results.
- Welfare maximization supports including consumption costs and earnings in CEA.
- The study provides guidance on applying the consistency principle.
Conclusions:
- The consistency principle in CEA is clarified, particularly regarding endogenous changes.
- Including consumption costs and earnings in CEA aligns with welfare maximization.
- This research aids in more accurate and comprehensive economic evaluations of medical interventions.
Abstract:
In addition to incurring direct treatment costs and generating direct health benefits that improve longevity and/or health-related quality of life, medical interventions often have further or "unrelated" financial and health impacts, raising the issue of what costs and effects should be included in calculating the cost-effectiveness ratio of an intervention. The "consistency principle" in medical cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) requires that one include both the cost and the utility benefit of a change (in medical expenditures, consumption, or leisure) caused by an intervention or neither of them. By distinguishing between exogenous changes directly brought about by an intervention and endogenous patient responses to the exogenous changes, and within a lifetime utility maximization framework, this article addresses 2 questions related to the consistency principle: 1) how to choose among alternative internally consistent exclusion/inclusion rules, and 2) what to do with survival consumption costs and earnings. It finds that, for an endogenous change, excluding or including both the cost and the utility benefit of the change does not alter cost-effectiveness results. Further, in agreement with the consistency principle, welfare maximization implies that consumption costs and earnings during the extended life directly caused by an intervention should be included in CEA.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Analysis of Population Pharmacokinetic Data
Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Relationship: Problems
Dose-Response Relationship: Potency and Efficacy
Pharmacodynamic Models: Direct Effect Model and Indirect Response Model
Dosage Regimens: Partial Pharmacokinetic Parameters

