Is NICE's Cost Effectiveness Threshold Too High? UK

Main Category: Public Health
Also Included In: Regulatory Affairs / Drug Approvals
Article Date: 30 Aug 2007 - 2:00 PDT

email icon email to a friend   printer icon printer friendly   write icon opinions  

Current Article Ratings:

Patient / Public:5 stars

5 (1 votes)

Healthcare Prof:4 stars

4 (1 votes)


Is NICE's cost effectiveness threshold too generous, ask experts in this week's BMJ?

The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) is an independent body that decides which drugs should be available on the NHS in England and Wales. Since its inception in 1999, NICE has adopted a cost effectiveness threshold range of £20,000 to £30,000 per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained. A QALY is a combined measure of quantity and quality of life.

But the uncomfortable truth is that NICE's threshold has no basis in either theory or evidence, argue John Appleby, Chief Economist at the King's Fund, and colleagues Nancy Devlin and David Parkin at City University in London.

Cost effectiveness is emerging as a key factor in an ongoing House of Commons Select Committee inquiry into NICE, which has received evidence that the threshold may be too generous, they explain. If this suggestion is correct, the implications are profound.

It means that NICE has recommended too many new technologies. It also means that when primary care trusts implement NICE's guidance, resources may be diverted from other healthcare services that are better value for money.

By setting the hurdle too low, NICE might reduce the efficiency of the NHS, they warn.

So, what should the threshold be? Evidence suggests a mismatch between NICE's threshold range and that apparent elsewhere in the NHS. For example, the average primary care trusts spends £12,000 to gain an extra QALY in circulatory disease and £19,000 in cancer. In contrast, an analysis of NICE's decisions suggests that its threshold is in practice even more generous than NICE admits, being closer to £45,000.

The authors recommend that the NHS be given independence from the Department of Health on the specific matter of setting a cost effectiveness threshold, in the same way that the Bank of England has operational independence from the treasury so that it can set UK interest rates to contain inflation.

NICE conjuring up a threshold and others not using one at all creates neither efficiency nor fairness in the NHS, they conclude.

Editorial: NICE's cost effectiveness threshold
BMJ Volume 335 pp 358-9
http://www.bmj.com

Article adapted by Medical News Today from original press release.
Visit our public health section for the latest news on this subject.
There are no references listed for this article.
Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

MLA
BMJ. "Is NICE's Cost Effectiveness Threshold Too High? UK." Medical News Today. MediLexicon, Intl., 30 Aug. 2007. Web.
15 Feb. 2012. <http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/80960.php>

APA
BMJ. (2007, August 30). "Is NICE's Cost Effectiveness Threshold Too High? UK." Medical News Today. Retrieved from
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/80960.php.

Please note: If no author information is provided, the source is cited instead.


Public Health

Tips For Healthy Flying

There was a time when jumping on a plane was a relatively easy thing to do (assuming you had the money). But today's flying experience is often more of an ordeal than a pleasure. Read more...

Do You Know What Drowning Looks Like?

If you and your family are planning to spend some of the summer by the sea, by the pool, or perhaps even a river or lake, perhaps you should ask yourself: do you really know what drowning looks like? Read more...

Most Popular Articles



Follow Our Public Health News On Twitter

Follow Us On Twitter
Get the latest news for this category delivered straight to your Twitter account. Simply visit our Public Health Twitter account and select the 'follow' option.



View list of all 'What Is...' articles »