• All Topics
  • Health Technology Assessment (HTA)
  • Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
OHE OHE
Newsletter SignupSubscribe

News & Insights
  • News
  • Events
  • Insights
  • Bulletin
  • News
  • Events
  • Insights
  • Bulletin

News & Insights

  • News
  • Events
  • Insights
  • Bulletin
Newsletter SignupSubscribe
  • News
  • Events
  • Insights
  • Bulletin

Close
OHE OHE
  • Research & Publications
  • News & Insights
  • Education
  • Innovation Policy Prize
  • Events
  • About Us
  • OHE Experts
  • Contact Us
Newsletter SignupSubscribe

Research & Publications

All Publications

Filter by:
  • Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
  • Biosimilars
  • Cell and Gene Therapies
  • Chronic Diseases
  • Combination Therapies
  • COVID-19 Research
  • Digital Health
  • Drug Development/R&D
  • Emerging Markets
  • EQ-5D and PROMs
  • Health Care Systems
  • Health Data and Statistics
  • Health Technology Assessment
  • Precision Medicine
  • Real-World Evidence
  • Use of Medicines
  • Value-Based Pricing
  • Vaccine Research
  • Economics of Innovation
  • Measuring and Valuing Outcomes
  • Policy, Organisation and Incentives in Health Systems
  • Value, Affordability and Decision Making

News & Insights

  • News
  • Events
  • Insights
  • Bulletin

Education

  • Education Hub
  • OHE Graduate School
  • EVIA Programme
  • IRA Programme

Innovation Policy Prize

  • The Prize Fund
  • 2022 Prize Fund

Latest Research & Publications

  • Health Technology Assessment…
  • Israel

NICE enough? Do NICE’s Decision Outcomes Impact International HTA Decision-making?

andrew-butler-aUu8tZFNgfM-unsplash
Read more
  • Health Technology Assessment…
  • Value, Affordability, and…
  • Gene therapies

Are Recommendations for HTA of Gene Therapies Being Achieved?

cover 3
Read more
  • Chronic Diseases
  • Value, Affordability, and…
  • Dermatology

The Burden of Hidradenitis Suppurativa on Patients, the NHS and Society

jakob-braun-HfOOKAPsE28-unsplash
Read more
  • Digital Health
  • Economics of Innovation
  • Mental Health

Dementia in the UK: Estimating the Potential Future Impact and Return on Research Investment

image option 1
Read more
  • Precision Medicine
  • Economics of Innovation

The Case for Expanding Uptake of Next-Generation Sequencing for Lung Cancer in Europe

NGS report_AdobeStock_406823942_portrait
Read more
  • Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
  • Economics of Innovation

A Novel Incentive Model for Uptake of Diagnostics to Combat Antimicrobial Resistance

Roche AMR diangostics_national-cancer-institute-2fyeLhUeYpg-unsplash_portrait
Read more
  • Health Technology Assessment…
  • Value, Affordability, and…
  • Pricing and Reimbursement

Real-World Evidence: Current Best Practice for Reimbursement Decision-Making

RWE_clay-banks-b5S4FrJb7yQ-unsplash_portrait
Read more
  • Value-Based Pricing
  • Economics of Innovation
  • Pricing and Reimbursement

Delivering the Triple Win: A Value-Based Approach to Pricing

Triple_Win_AdobeStock_249059909_portrait_v2
Read more
Close
OHE
  • All Publications

    Filter by:
    • Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR)
    • Biosimilars
    • Cell and Gene Therapies
    • Chronic Diseases
    • Combination Therapies
    • COVID-19 Research
    • Digital Health
    • Drug Development/R&D
    • Emerging Markets
    • EQ-5D and PROMs
    • Health Care Systems
    • Health Data and Statistics
    • Health Technology Assessment
    • Precision Medicine
    • Real-World Evidence
    • Use of Medicines
    • Value-Based Pricing
    • Vaccine Research
    • Economics of Innovation
    • Measuring and Valuing Outcomes
    • Policy, Organisation and Incentives in Health Systems
    • Value, Affordability and Decision Making
    • News
    • Events
    • Insights
    • Bulletin
    • Education Hub
    • OHE Graduate School
    • EVIA Programme
    • IRA Programme
    • The Prize Fund
    • 2022 Prize Fund
  • Events
  • About Us
  • OHE Experts
  • Contact Us
Newsletter SignupSubscribe
Back
  • News
11 min read 12th December 2013

Inconsistent Use of Cost-effectiveness Thresholds in NHS Scotland

This study finds an apparent mismatch in the decision making approaches of the SMC and the NHS Boards. OHE today released a Research Paper on the use of QALY thresholds in NHS Scotland for health services that were “at the…

Share:
  •  Twitter
  •  LinkedIn
  •  Facebook
  • has-icon Email

This study finds an apparent mismatch in the decision making approaches of the SMC and the NHS Boards.

OHE today released a Research Paper on the use of QALY thresholds in NHS Scotland for health services that were “at the margin” in 2012–13, i.e. those for which investment or disinvestment was planned or occurred. The study was based on information from three sources.

OHE today released a Research Paper on the use of QALY thresholds in NHS Scotland for health services that were “at the margin” in 2012–13, i.e. those for which investment or disinvestment was planned or occurred.

The study was based on information from three sources. The starting point was public information from the Scottish Parliament’s examination of the NHS Boards’ expenditure plans. This was supplemented by interviews with the Finance Directors of Scotland’s territorial NHS Boards, which both gauged bases for decisions and gathered more detailed information on planned new expenditures and delayed or rejected spending plans. A literature review sought cost-per-QALY information for the marginal services identified.

The NHS Board interviews revealed a considerable and varied list of health care services and technologies at the margin of NHS spending in one or more of the 14 NHS Board areas in Scotland. The literature review discovered cost-per-QALY evidence for some, though not all, of these services. The reseearch found that any one health care technology typically has a wide range of cost-per-QALY estimates associated with it. The authors also found considerable overlap in the cost-per-QALY ranges for services experiencing investment and those experiencing disinvestment, implying “allocative inefficiency if the aim of the NHS in Scotland is to maximise QALYs”.

The interviews revealed that, in practice, cost-per-QALY evidence was not generally taken into account in NHS Board expenditure decisions about marginal services. The authors observe that the NHS Boards do not priorise their spending so as to maximize QALYs, but appear to be aiming instead at a multidimensional set of objectives. The Boards’ approaches to setting spending priorities, then, is fundamentally different from that of the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), which bases its health technology assessments around the incremental cost per QALY.

This apparent mismatch between the approaches of the NHS Boards and the SMC raise important policy issues. The authors summarise the options: “Either the SMC should adjust its methods to more closely align with the objectives of the NHS or the NHS itself should attempt to more often make decisions based on the incremental cost per QALY gained of the services it provides. A third option is that the two organisations ‘meet in the middle’ by using cost per QALY evidence in the areas” where it is most appropriate and useful.

Download: Schaffer, S.K., Sussex, J., Devlin, N. and Walker, A. (2013) Searching for cost-effectiveness thresholds in NHS Scotland. Research Paper 13/07. London: Office of Health Economics.

For further information, please contact Jon Sussex.  

  • Health Care Systems
  • Value, Affordability, and…
  • Research Papers

Related News

  • News
  • December 2020

Should We ‘Drop Dead’ from Health State Valuation?

Read more
  • News
  • September 2020

Cornerstones of ‘Fair’ Drug Coverage

Read more
  • News
  • January 2020

Anchoring Latent Scale Values for the EQ-5D-Y at 0 = Dead

Read more
  • News
  • September 2019

HTA and Payment Mechanisms for New Drugs to Tackle AMR

Read more
footer_ohe_logo

Leading intellectual authority on global health economics

Sign Up for OHE Insights, Events & News Bulletin

Newsletter SignupStart Sign Up

Research & Publications

News & Insights

Innovation Policy Prize

Education

Events

About Us

OHE Experts

Contact Us

Sign Up for OHE Insights, Events & News Bulletin

Newsletter SignupStart Sign Up

The Office of Health Economics (OHE) is a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (registered number 09848965) and its registered office is at 2nd Floor Goldings House, Hay’s Galleria, 2 Hay’s Lane, London, SE1 2HB.

Terms & Conditions

Privacy Policy

Cookies Policy

© 2023 Website Design

An error has occurred, please try again later.An error has occurred, please try again later.

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

You can find out more about which cookies we are using or switch them off in .

 Twitter
 Facebook
 LinkedIn
 Copy
 Email
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.

3rd Party Cookies

This website uses Google Analytics to collect anonymous information such as the number of visitors to the site, and the most popular pages.

Keeping this cookie enabled helps us to improve our website.

Please enable Strictly Necessary Cookies first so that we can save your preferences!