For the purpose of economic evaluation in the health economics, several analytical techniques that are designed for comparing two or more health interventions in terms of costs and effects are used. Cost-benefit analysis provides the opportunity of comparing values of alternative health interventions that have very different health benefits, which significantly facilitates comparisons. The purpose is to assess the relationship between the cost and utility of health interventions in terms of the patient’s number of years in full health. The most commonly used measure in these analyses is QALY (Quality-djusted life-year). QALY is a measure of the impact of health interventions and treatment that combines two dimensions of health outcomes: the degree of health improvement and the time period for which the improvement of health is exhibited, including the length of life. Determining the QALY is one of the most effective ways of decision-making about distribution of resources in the health care system. The method is designed to distribute resources in such a way as to be spent where they will bring the maximum possible benefit for the patient. If we have to make decisions how to direct funds from limited budgets, then each and the lowest cost has to correlate to the maximum possible benefit and these methods are the best tool under such conditions.
Hartrick CT, Kovan JP, Shapiro S. The numeric rating scale for clinical pain measurement: a ratio measu re? Pain Pract. 2003;3(4):310–6.
2.
Hirskyj P. QALY: An Ethical Issue that Dare Not Speak its Name. Nurs Ethics. 2007;1(14):172–82.
3.
Schlander M. Measures of efficiency in healthcare: QALMs about QALYs? Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesund hwes. 2010;104(3):214–26.
4.
Prieto L, Sacristán JA. Problems and solu tions in calculating quality-adjusted life years (QALYs. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003;1:80.
5.
Brower A. Is It Time To Take a Harder Look at the QALY? Biotechnol Healthc. 2008;5(3):47–8.
6.
Weinstein MC. How Much Are Americans Willing to Pay for a Quality-Adjusted Life Year? Medical Care. 2008;4:46.
7.
Baker R. Weighting and valuing quality-adjusted life-years using stated preference methods: preliminary results from the Social Value of a QALY Project. Health Technology Assessment. 2010;14:27.
8.
Donaldson C. The social value of a QALY: rai sing the bar or barring the raise? BMC Health Servi ces Research. 2011;11:8.
9.
Kind P. The Use of QALYs in Clinical and Pa tient Decision-Making, Issues and Prospects. Value in Health. 2009;12(S1):27–30.
10.
Sassi F. Calculating QALYs, comparing QALY and DALY calculations. Health Policy Plan. 2006;21(5):402–8.
11.
Meltzer MI. Introduction to health economics for phy sicians. Lancet. 2001;358(9286):993–8.
12.
Gafni A. The standard gamble method: what is being measured and how it is interpreted. Health Serv Res. 1994;29(2):207–24.
13.
Burstrom. A comparison of individual and social time-trade-off values for health states in the general population. Health Policy. 2006;76(3):359–70.
14.
Bjegović-Mikanović V. Osnove menadžmenta u sistemu zdravstvene zaštite. In: Ministartsvo zdravlja Republike Srbije. 2011. p. 354–61.
15.
Malek MIQALYS. Hayward Medical Co mmunications. 2007;1–8.
16.
C P, G T. What is a QALY? Hayward Medical Communications. 2003;1 5.
17.
Weinstein MC, Torrance G, McGuire A. QALYs: The Basics. Value in health. 2009;12(S1):5–9.
18.
Bleichrodt H. Peter Wakker, and Magnus Johann esson.Characterizing QALYs by Risk Neutrality. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty. 1997;15:107–14.
19.
M.C. W, W.B S. Foundations of cost effectiveness analysis for health and medical practi ces. N Engl J Med. 1977;296:716–21.
20.
Torrance G. Measurement of health state utilities for economic appraisal. J Health Econ. 1986;5:1–3.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
