Patient and Informal Caregiver Time in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis:A Response to the Recommendations of the Washington Panel
- 1 January 1998
- journal article
- general essays
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
- Vol. 14 (3) , 505-513
- https://doi.org/10.1017/s026646230001148x
Abstract
The time invested by patients and informal caregivers in treatment and rehabilitation should be valued in a cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA). The Washington Panel gives recommendations on incorporation of time costs that may misrepresent true societal costs. This article provides alternative recommendations for incorporating costs of time in CEA. Following an opportunity costs approach, time is separated into three parts, each with its own valuation methods: time spent on paid work, unpaid work, and leisure.Keywords
This publication has 12 references indexed in Scilit:
- Avoiding Double-Counting in Pharmacoeconomic StudiesPharmacoEconomics, 1997
- Productivity Costs Measurement Through Quality of Life? A Response to the Recommendation of the Washington PanelHealth Economics, 1997
- Reply to Johanneson's and Karlsson's commentJournal of Health Economics, 1997
- The friction cost method: A commentJournal of Health Economics, 1997
- A Practical Guide for Calculating Indirect Costs of DiseasePharmacoEconomics, 1996
- Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and MedicineJAMA, 1996
- Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and MedicinePublished by American Medical Association (AMA) ,1996
- Indirect cost in economic evaluation: The opportunity cost of unpaid inputsHealth Economics, 1996
- The friction cost method for measuring indirect costs of diseaseJournal of Health Economics, 1995
- Informal care and economic appraisal: A discussion of possible methodological approachesHealth Economics, 1994