Top

Published in:

Open Access 01-03-2016 | Original Research Article

Use of Value of Information in Healthcare Decision Making: Exploring Multiple Perspectives

Authors: Jill Bindels, Bram Ramaekers, Isaac Corro Ramos, Leyla Mohseninejad, Saskia Knies, Janneke Grutters, Maarten Postma, Maiwenn Al, Talitha Feenstra, Manuela Joore

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 3/2016

Abstract

Background

Value of information (VOI) is a tool that can be used to inform decisions concerning additional research in healthcare. VOI estimates the value of obtaining additional information and indicates the optimal design for additional research. Although it is recognized as good practice in handling uncertainty, it is still hardly used in decision making in the Netherlands.

Objective

This paper aims to examine the potential value of VOI, barriers and facilitators and the way forward with the use of VOI in the decision-making process for reimbursement of pharmaceuticals in the Netherlands.

Methods

Three focus group interviews were conducted with researchers, policy makers, and representatives of pharmaceutical companies.

Results

The results revealed that although all stakeholders recognize the relevance of VOI, it is hardly used and many barriers to the performance and use of VOI were identified. One of these barriers is that not all uncertainties are easily incorporated in VOI, and the results may be biased if structural uncertainties are ignored. Furthermore, not all research designs indicated by VOI may be feasible in practice.

Conclusions

To fully embed VOI into current decision-making processes, a threshold incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and guidelines that clarify when and how VOI should be performed are needed. In addition, it should be clear to all stakeholders how the results of VOI are used in decision making.

Available only for authorised users

Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Representing uncertainty: the role of cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Health Econ. 2001;10(8):779–87.CrossRefPubMed

Briggs A, Claxton K, Sculpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Handbooks in health economic evaluation series. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.

Eckermann S, Willan AR. Expected value of information and decision making in HTA. Health Econ. 2007;16(2):195–209. doi:10.1002/hec.1161.CrossRefPubMed

Grutters JP, Abrams KR, de Ruysscher D, Pijls-Johannesma M, Peters HJ, Beutner E, et al. When to wait for more evidence? Real options analysis in proton therapy. Oncologist. 2011;16(12):1752–61. doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2011-0029.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Blommestein HM, Franken MG, Verelst SG, van Agthoven M, Huijgens PC, Uyl-de Groot CA. Access to expensive cancer drugs in Dutch daily practice: should we be concerned? Neth J Med. 2014;72(4):235–41.PubMed

Fenwick E, Claxton K, Sculpher M. The value of implementation and the value of information: combined and uneven development. Med Decis Mak. 2008;28(1):21–32. doi:10.1177/0272989x07308751.CrossRef

Briggs AH, Weinstein MC, Fenwick EAL, Karnon J, Sculpher MJ, Paltiel AD. Model parameter estimation and uncertainty analysis: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force Working Group–6. Med Decis Mak. 2012;32(5):722–32. doi:10.1177/0272989x12458348.CrossRef

Steuten L, van de Wetering G, Groothuis-Oudshoorn K, Retel V. A systematic and critical review of the evolving methods and applications of value of information in academia and practice. PharmacoEconomics. 2013;31(1):25–48. doi:10.1007/s40273-012-0008-3.CrossRefPubMed

Tong A, Sainsbury P, Craig J. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. 2007;19(6):349–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042. Accessed 1 Oct 2015

10.

Polit DF, Beck CT. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, a Wolters Kluwer business; 2008.

11.

Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15(9):1277–88. doi:10.1177/1049732305276687.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Lincoln YS, Guba EG. Naturalistic inquiry Newbury Park. CA: Sage Publications; 1985.

13.

Coyle D, Buxton MJ, O’Brien BJ. Measures of importance for economic analysis based on decision modeling. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(10):989–97. doi:10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00176-8.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Corro Ramos I, Rutten-van Mölken MPMH, Al MJ. The role of value-of-information analysis in a health care research priority setting: a theoretical case study. Med Decis Mak. 2013;33(4):472–89. doi:10.1177/0272989x12468616.

15.

Wilson EC. A practical guide to value of information analysis. PharmacoEconomics. 2014. doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0219-x.PubMed

16.

Tuffaha HW, Gordon LG, Scuffham PA. Value of information analysis in oncology: the value of evidence and evidence of value. J Oncol Pract. 2014;10(2):e55–62. doi:10.1200/jop.2013.001108.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Strong M, Oakley JE, Brennan A. Estimating multiparameter partial expected value of perfect information from a probabilistic sensitivity analysis sample: a nonparametric regression approach. Med Decis Mak. 2013. doi:10.1177/0272989x13505910.

18.

Strong M, Oakley JE, Brennan A, Breeze P. Estimating the expected value of sample information using the probabilistic sensitivity analysis sample: a fast nonparametric regression-based method. Med Decis Mak. 2015. doi:10.1177/0272989x15575286.

19.

Bojke L, Claxton K, Sculpher M, Palmer S. Characterizing structural uncertainty in decision analytic models: a review and application of methods. Value Health. 2009;12(5):739–49. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00502.x.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Corro Ramos I, Rutten-Van Mölken MP, Al MJ. Determining the impact of modeling additional sources of uncertainty in value-of-information analysis. Value in Health. 2015;18(1):100–9. doi:10.1016/j.jval.2014.09.003.CrossRef

21.

Broekhuizen H, Groothuis-Oudshoorn CG, van Til JA, Hummel JM, IJzerman IJ. A review and classification of approaches for dealing with uncertainty in multi-criteria decision analysis for healthcare decisions. PharmacoEconomics. 2015. doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0251-x.PubMedCentralPubMed

22.

Mohseninejad L. Uncertainty in economic evaluations: implications for healthcare decisions. Groningen: University of Groningen; 2013.

23.

Vemer P, Rutten-van Mölken MP. Largely ignored: the impact of the threshold value for a QALY on the importance of a transferability factor. Eur J Health Econ. 2011;12(5):397–404. doi:10.1007/s10198-010-0253-3.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

24.

Vemer P, Rutten-van Mölken MP. Crossing borders: factors affecting differences in cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions between European countries. Value Health. 2010;13(2):230–41. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00612.x.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Claxton K, Griffin S, Koffijberg H, McKenna C. Expected health benefits of additional evidence: principles, methods and applications. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, CHE Research; 2013. Paper 83.

Title: Use of Value of Information in Healthcare Decision Making: Exploring Multiple Perspectives
Authors: Jill Bindels
Bram Ramaekers
Isaac Corro Ramos
Leyla Mohseninejad
Saskia Knies
Janneke Grutters
Maarten Postma
Maiwenn Al
Talitha Feenstra
Manuela Joore
Publication date: 01-03-2016
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: PharmacoEconomics / Issue 3/2016
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40273-015-0346-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Use of Value of Information in Healthcare Decision Making: Exploring Multiple Perspectives

Abstract

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2016

Budget Impact Analysis of Using Dihydroartemisinin–Piperaquine to Treat Uncomplicated Malaria in Children in Tanzania

Are Efficient Designs Used in Discrete Choice Experiments Too Difficult for Some Respondents? A Case Study Eliciting Preferences for End-of-Life Care

Vedolizumab for the Treatment of Adults with Moderate-to-Severe Active Ulcerative Colitis: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

Zaheer-Ud-Din Babar (ed): Pharmaceutical Prices in the 21st Century

Methods for Health Economic Evaluation of Vaccines and Immunization Decision Frameworks: A Consensus Framework from a European Vaccine Economics Community

Cost-Effectiveness Models in Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Issues and Challenges