Using Economic Evaluation Techniques to Inform Policy: Reflections from Some UK Studies

Abstract

Economic evaluation techniques are designed to provide some clear guidance to decision makers on the choice, in value for money terms, between specific interventions. However, such evaluations require a range of assumptions to be taken and these choices may impact on the ranking of interventions. This article explores these issues that arise in providing such policy relevant estimates using data from a number of recently completed United Kingdom (UK) studies. The broad welfarist approach which considers all costs and consequences is contrasted to a decision-maker approach taking a more restrictive set of costs and outcomes.

The choice of perspective is shown to be an important issues affecting choices of different policies and interventions. Data from the UK studies also suggests there is currently insufficient evidence to support the general health outcome, Quality Adjust Life Years (QALYs) measure recommended by UK regulatory authorities to serve as a main individual drug user outcome. Crime and productivity costs have been a major part of many international evaluations but have mean measured and valued differently and different treatment across different studies can lead to different policy recommendations. The technicalities behind some economic studies should not obscure some of these important issues and the implications for intervention and policy choices.