← Back to Volume 6, Issue 7

Analysis on Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of Health Technology Assessment in Critical Care Medicine from the Global Health Perspective

Xuan Wang
Vol.6, No.7, pp.55-62, 2026 DOI: 10.62051/ijphmr.v6n7.08 August 28, 2026
Download PDF
Abstract: Critical care medicine is relatively expensive in terms of medical resources. Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and its subset, cost-utility analysis (CUA), are employed in health technology assessment (HTA) to determine the economic value of intervention measures, and a separate budget impact analysis is performed to assess how the introduction of new technology will affect the budget. Both are used to make selections. This paper reviews the progress of health technology assessment (HTA) in the field of global critical care medicine, analyzes the application features of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) in the evaluation of ICU intervention measures, explores the methodological logic and practical value of budget impact analysis for technology access, and puts forward optimisation paths based on the actual constraints of middle-and low-income countries. A total of 219 full economic evaluation studies on ICU intervention measures have been published from 1993 to 2023. The number of publications has risen substantially in the past decade; only 1% originate from middle-and low-income countries, and 58% are model-based studies. In addition, there are many problems in the previous studies that make it difficult to draw broad conclusions. The World's critical care medicine HTA system should take both cost-effectiveness and budget impact into account and build a more flexible evaluation system for countries with different levels of resources.
Keywords: Health technology assessment, Critical care medicine, Cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), Cost-utility analysis (CUA), Budget impact analysis, Global health
APA Citation: Xuan Wang (2026). Analysis on Cost-effectiveness and Budget Impact of Health Technology Assessment in Critical Care Medicine from the Global Health Perspective. International Journal of Public Health and Medical Research, 6(7), 55-62. https://doi.org/10.62051/ijphmr.v6n7.08

References

  1. Society of Critical Care Medicine. (2024). Critical care statistics. https://www.sccm.org/Communications/Critical-Care-Statistics
  2. O'Rourke, B., Oortwijn, W., & Schuller, T. (2020). The new definition of health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 36(3), 187–190.
  3. Higgins, A. M., Carney, T. M., Carrandi, A., Nguyen, C.-L., Tse, W. C., & Fagery, M. (2025). Health economic evaluations in intensive care: An updated systematic review. Critical Care Explorations, 7(7), e1288.
  4. Henschke, C., Panteli, D., Perleth, M., & Busse, R. (2015). Taxonomy of medical devices in the logic of health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31(5), 324–330.
  5. Guzman, J., Fan, V. Y., & Baker, P. (2023). The future of health technology assessment in low-and middle-income countries. Health Systems & Reform, 9(3), 2400399.
  6. Falkowski, A., Ciminata, G., Manca, F., Bouttell, J., Jaiswal, N., Kamaruzaman, H. F., & Grieve, E. (2023). How least developed to lower-middle income countries use health technology assessment: A scoping review. Pathogens and Global Health, 117(2), 104–119.
  7. Shields, G. E., Wilberforce, M., Clarkson, P., Farragher, T., Verma, A., & Davies, L. M. (2022). Factors limiting subgroup analysis in cost-effectiveness analysis and a call for transparency. Pharmacoeconomics, 40(2), 149–156.
  8. Chacko, B., Ramakrishnan, N., & Peter, J. V. (2023). Approach to intensive care costing and provision of cost-effective care. Indian Journal of Critical Care Medicine, 27(12), 876.
  9. Sullivan, S. D., Mauskopf, J. A., Augustovski, F., Caro, J. J., Lee, K. M., & Minchin, M. (2014). Budget impact analysis—principles of good practice: Report of the ISPOR 2012 Budget Impact Analysis Good Practice II Task Force. Value in Health, 17(1), 5–14.
  10. Foroutan, N., Tarride, J. E., Xie, F., & Levine, M. (2018). A methodological review of national and transnational pharmaceutical budget impact analysis guidelines. ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research, 821–854.
  11. Mauskopf, J. A., Sullivan, S. D., Annemans, L., Caro, J., & Mullins, C. D. (2007). Principles of good practice for budget impact analysis: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on good research practices. Value in Health, 10(5), 336–347.
  12. Garnfeldt, V. M., Vincent, J. L., Gruson, D., Garay, O. U., Vansieleghem, S., Iniguez, L., & Lefevre, A. (2023). The budget impact of procalcitonin-guided antibiotic stewardship compared to standard of care for patients with suspected sepsis admitted to the intensive care unit. PLOS One, 18(10), e0293544.
  13. Drummond, M. F., Sculpher, M. J., Claxton, K., Stoddart, G. L., & Torrance, G. W. (2015). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford University Press.
  14. Kleijnen, S., Toenders, W., de Groot, F., Huic, M., George, E., & Wieseler, B. (2015). European collaboration on relative effectiveness assessments: What is needed to be successful? Health Policy, 119(5), 569–576.
  15. Demirdjian, G. (2015). A 10-year hospital-based health technology assessment program in a public hospital. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31(1–2), 103–110.
  16. World Health Organization. (2025). Health technology assessment of medical devices. World Health Organization.
  17. Munung, N. S., Mayosi, B. M., & de Vries, J. (2017). Equity in international health research collaborations in Africa. PLOS One, 12(10), e0186237.
  18. Lakdawalla, D. N., & Phelps, C. E. (2022). A guide to extending and implementing generalized risk-adjusted cost-effectiveness (GRACE). The European Journal of Health Economics, 23(3), 433–451.
  19. Sanders, G. D., Neumann, P. J., Basu, A., Brock, D. W., & Feeny, D. (2016). Recommendations for conduct, methodological practices, and reporting of cost-effectiveness analyses: Second panel on cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. JAMA, 316(10), 1093–1103.
  20. Mulligan, K., Baid, D., Manetas, M. A., & Lakdawalla, D. N. (2025). Measuring the budget impact of nondiscriminatory cost-effectiveness. In JAMA Health Forum (Vol. 6, No. 9, pp. e253076–e253076). American Medical Association.
  21. Higgins, A. M., Brooker, J. E., Mackie, M., Cooper, D. J., & Harris, A. H. (2020). Health economic evaluations of sepsis interventions in critically ill adult patients: A systematic review. Journal of Intensive Care, 8(1), 5.