Willingness to pay for on-demand and prophylactic treatment for severe haemophilia in Sweden

被引:14
作者
Carlsson, KS
Höjgård, S
Lethagen, S
Lindgren, A
Berntorp, E
Lindgren, B
机构
[1] Lund Univ, Ctr Hlth Econ, SE-22007 Lund, Sweden
[2] Lund Univ, Malmo Univ Hosp, Dept Community Med, SE-22007 Lund, Sweden
[3] Lund Univ, Malmo Univ Hosp, Dept Coagulat Disorders, Lund, Sweden
[4] Lund Inst Technol, Ctr Math Sci, Lund, Sweden
关键词
cost-benefit analysis; economic evaluation; on-demand; prophylaxis; willingness to pay;
D O I
10.1111/j.1365-2516.2004.00954.x
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
The objective of the present paper was to provide an estimate of the benefits of on-demand and prophylaxis treatment strategies for severe haemophilia in monetary terms. Using the contingent-valuation method, which simulates a missing market by asking people about their willingness to pay (WTP), we asked a representative sample (n = 609) of the Swedish population if they would be willing to pay a specific amount (bid) so that patients with severe haemophilia could receive on-demand treatment and another bid for prophylactic treatment. Different respondents were offered different bids and the bid vector ranged from 71 Euro cents to EUR 130. The order of the bid questions was randomized so that half of the respondents were asked first about their WTP for on-demand treatment, and then about their WTP for prophylaxis, while the order was reversed for the other half of the respondents. The mean estimated WTP (year 2002) was EUR 39 (95% CI 31-47) for on-demand and EUR 65 (95% CI 55-73) for prophylaxis. Our sensitivity analysis showed that the ranking of the two treatment alternatives was robust in that the WTP was greater for prophylaxis in all possible subsets. The point estimates of WTP varied somewhat in subsets defined by individual characteristics, but confidence intervals always overlapped that of the main results. The WTP for on-demand and prophylaxis exceeded the calculated cost of treatment per taxpayer of providing on-demand and prophylactic treatment, respectively, based on our previous results [1].
引用
收藏
页码:527 / 541
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
[11]   Contingent valuation and revealed preference methodologies: Comparing the estimates for quasi-public goods [J].
Carson, RT ;
Flores, NE ;
Martin, KM ;
Wright, JL .
LAND ECONOMICS, 1996, 72 (01) :80-99
[12]   Referendum design and contingent valuation: The NOAA panel's no-vote recommendation (vol 80, pg 335, 1998) [J].
Carson, RT ;
Hanemann, WM ;
Kopp, RJ ;
Krosnick, JA ;
Mitchell, RC ;
Presser, S ;
Ruud, PA ;
Smith, VK ;
Conaway, M ;
Martin, K .
REVIEW OF ECONOMICS AND STATISTICS, 1998, 80 (03) :484-487
[13]  
Carson RT, 1997, DETERMINING VALUE NO
[14]   Testing the convergent validity of the contingent valuation and travel cost methods in valuing the benefits of health care [J].
Clarke, PM .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2002, 11 (02) :117-127
[15]   Unbiased value estimates for environmental goods: A cheap talk design for the contingent valuation method [J].
Cummings, RG ;
Taylor, LO .
AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1999, 89 (03) :649-665
[16]   Are hypothetical referenda incentive compatible? [J].
Cummings, RG ;
Elliott, S ;
Harrison, GW ;
James, M .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL ECONOMY, 1997, 105 (03) :609-621
[17]  
CUMMINGS RG, 1995, AM ECON REV, V85, P260
[18]   Alternative approaches to obtain optimal bid values in contingent valuation studies and to model protest zeros: Estimating the determinants of individuals' willingness to pay for home care services in day case surgery [J].
Dalmau-Matarrodona, E .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2001, 10 (02) :101-118
[19]  
Drummond M., 2015, METHODS EC EVALUATIO, V4
[20]   The nature of human altruism [J].
Fehr, E ;
Fischbacher, U .
NATURE, 2003, 425 (6960) :785-791