Explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation of public health interventions
- 1 January 2009
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Health Economics, Policy and Law
- Vol. 4 (2) , 231-245
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s1744133109004903
Abstract
Health equity is one of the main avowed objectives of public health policy across the world. Yet economic evaluations in public health (like those in health care more generally) continue to focus on maximizing health gain. Health equity considerations are rarely mentioned. Health economists rely on the quasi-egalitarian value judgment that ‘a QALY is a QALY’ – that is QALYs are equally weighted and the same health outcome is worth the same no matter how it is achieved or to whom it accrues. This value judgment is questionable in many important circumstances in public health. For example, policy-makers may place rather little value on health outcomes achieved by infringing individual liberties or by discriminating on the basis of age, sex, or race. Furthermore, there is evidence that a majority of the general public wish to give greater weight to health gains accruing to children, the severely ill, and, to a lesser extent, the socio-economically disadvantaged. This paper outlines four approaches to explicit incorporation of equity considerations into economic evaluation in public health: (i) review of background information on equity, (ii) health inequality impact assessment, (iii) analysis of the opportunity cost of equity, and (iv) equity weighting of health outcomes. The first three approaches can readily be applied using standard methods of health technology assessment, where suitable data are available; whereas approaches for generating equity weights remain experimental. The potential benefits of considering equity are likely to be largest in cases involving: (a) interventions that target disadvantaged individuals or communities and are also relatively cost-ineffective and (b) interventions to encourage lifestyle change, which may be relatively ineffective among ‘hard-to-reach’ disadvantaged groups and hence may require re-design to avoid increasing health inequalities.Keywords
This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Importance of relative measures in policy on health inequalitiesBMJ, 2006
- Applying clinical epidemiological methods to health equity: the equity effectiveness loopBMJ, 2006
- NICE's use of cost effectiveness as an exemplar of a deliberative processHealth Economics, Policy and Law, 2006
- An inquiry into the different perspectives that can be used when eliciting preferences in healthHealth Economics, 2002
- Valuing the benefits of publicly-provided health care: does ‘ability to pay’ preclude the use of ‘willingness to pay’?Social Science & Medicine, 1999
- 14 years of follow-up from the Edinburgh randomised trial of breast-cancer screeningThe Lancet, 1999
- Assessment of an inner city visual screening programme for preschool children.British Journal of Ophthalmology, 1995
- Socioeconomic disparities in preventive care persist despite universal coverage. Breast and cervical cancer screening in Ontario and the United StatesPublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1994
- Equity and equality in health and health careJournal of Health Economics, 1993
- Social Policy ExperimentationEvaluation Review, 1985