Skip to main content

Table 3 Awareness of stakeholders about basic health economic principles; level of agreement with statements by stakeholder category (scale responses: 1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree)

From: Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey

 

Decision-maker

Purchaser of services/pharma products

Professional service provider

Evidence generator

Advocate of health promotion

Total

Kruskal–Wallis test

Statements

n

Mean (SD)

n

Mean (SD)

n

Mean (SD)

n

Mean (SD)

n

Mean (SD)

n

Mean (SD)

P value

‘Incremental costs’ means by how much the studied intervention itself costs more or less than the comparator intervention

26

4.50 (1.77)

7

5.43 (1.90)

15

5.60 (1.64)

22

5.95 (1.50)

11

5.00 (1.84)

81

5.25 (1.76)

0.027

When an intervention in itself is cheap, it is always cost-effective compared to another intervention

29

1.76 (1.15)

7

2.29 (2.22)

18

2.89 (2.14)

25

1.32 (0.75)

14

1.64 (1.50)

93

1.88 (1.53)

0.027

‘Willingness to pay’ means how much a society is willing to pay for a quality-adjusted life year

26

4.19 (1.98)

7

3.86 (2.12)

15

4.87 (0.83)

22

4.64 (2.22)

10

4.40 (1.71)

80

4.44 (1.86)

0.73

My intervention can be cost-effective compared to another intervention, even when its societal costs are higher than the regular care

28

4.93 (1.84)

7

5.43 (2.07)

18

5.50 (1.69)

25

5.80 (1.92)

13

5.46 (1.71)

91

5.40 (1.83)

0.24

From a healthcare payer perspective indirect costs in full (such as 7productivity losses) are included

27

3.30 (2.15)

7

3.14 (2.04)

18

2.94 (2.16)

23

2.96 (2.18)

10

2.50 (2.12)

85

3.02 (2.11)

0.76

  1. SD, Standard deviation