Can We Incorporate Societal Values in Resource Allocation Decisions Among Disease Categories? An Empirical Approach

Abstract

ObjectivesHistorically, resource allocation decisions in healthcare are based on univariate approaches, inevitably overlooking value dimensions that are essential from a societal welfare maximization perspective. This article aims to present a wider perspective on decision making that incorporates societal values when prioritizing future resource allocation among disease areas. MethodsSociotechnical application of multiple-criteria decision analysis with a set of criteria (value judgments) that are based on positive as well as normative dimensions of resource allocation. We use Greece as a case study. Societal value judgments were sourced via a multidisciplinary panel of experts who collectively provided criteria weights and scores for each alternative (16 disease categories, classified according to the Global Burden of Disease study) against each criterion. An additive value function provided the total value in priority preference for each alternative. ResultsThe criteria that were deemed relevant to the decision-making process and their respective relative weights were burden of disease (0.245), capacity to benefit (0.190), direct cost and projected changes in the next 5 years (0.160), indirect cost (0.132), intensity of unmet needs (0.109), incidence of catastrophic expenditure (0.091), and caring externalities (0.073). The additive value function revealed that the top 5 priorities in highest total value scores were neoplasms, circulatory diseases, injuries, neurologic diseases, and musculoskeletal diseases. ConclusionsIncorporation of societal value criteria in resource allocation decisions can highlight priorities and lead to different sets of planning decisions than solely demand-driven allocation.