Transforming Disciplinary Traditions Comment on "Problems and Promises of Health Technologies: The Role of Early Health Economic Modeling".

Pascale Lehoux,Hudson Silva

doi:10.15171/ijhpm.2019.130

Abstract

Grutters et al show that economic assessments can inform the development of new health technologies at an early stage. This is an important contribution to health services and policy research, which implies a "shift away" from the more traditional forms of academic health economic modeling. Because transforming established disciplinary traditions is both valuable and demanding, we invite scholars to further the discussion on how the value of health innovations should be appraised in view of today’s societal challenges.

Highlights

What Makes Health Innovations Valuable in View of Current Societal Challenges? Rather than seeking to estimate the “exact cost-effectiveness of a technology,” Grutters et al[1] suggest that health economists should further explore “what is needed for a technology to provide most value for money.” Perhaps “value for money” is a term that deserves further definition for such an exploration to prove fruitful in the long run
We wonder whether such thresholds can guide innovators towards the development of the innovations contemporary health systems need
Improving the efficiency of Research & Development processes in healthcare is a matter of high societal importance, one that goes beyond health system governance and raises questions about the kinds of health innovation our systems of innovation should deliver

Summary

Introduction

What Makes Health Innovations Valuable in View of Current Societal Challenges? Rather than seeking to estimate the “exact cost-effectiveness of a technology,” Grutters et al[1] suggest that health economists should further explore “what is needed for a technology to provide most value for money.” Perhaps “value for money” is a term that deserves further definition for such an exploration to prove fruitful in the long run. This is an issue the authors do not fully address, they recognize the misalignment between a potentially cost-effective innovation and the administrative mechanism enabling its reimbursement, acquisition or use.

Results

Conclusion