Kosten-Wirksamkeits-Analysen als Grundlage für nachhaltige Versorgungsentscheide?

Widrig, Daniel; Tag, Brigitte

doi:10.24894/bf.2013.06015

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These comparisons involve drug prices from abroad and drug prices of therapeutic competitors. The Office does not apply, however, cost‐effectiveness as a tool to exclude or limit healthcare coverage based on cost‐benefit or cost‐impact analysis (Gächter & Meienberger 2012; Widrig & Tag 2013; Rütsche & Wildi 2016). This generous practice has resulted in extensive coverage of treatments.…”

Section: Regulatory Standard Of Reasonable Carementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Cost‐effectiveness as a comparative rather than an excluding or limit‐setting tool is one of the main features of the standard of reasonable care. Based on this generous definition of reasonableness, it is rarely a question of having or not having access to healthcare for a specific condition, but more about treatment options for the same condition available within the benefits' catalog (Paris & Docteur 2007; Gächter & Meienberger 2012; Widrig & Tag 2013; Rütsche & Wildi 2016).…”

Section: Regulatory Standard Of Reasonable Carementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The rise of the Swiss regulatory healthcare state: On preserving the just in the quest for the better (or less expensive?)

Levy

2020

Regulation & Governance

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Political theories of the modern state describe a rise of the regulatory healthcare state, balancing the imperatives of cost control and quality assurance and welfare norms such as solidarity. This paper analyses the unique case of Switzerland, where the rise of the regulatory healthcare state occurred late and incompletely, with the adoption of the Federal Health Insurance Law in 1994. The Swiss federal state pursues the social objective of universal access to healthcare through social health insurance regulation. This paper demonstrates that economic efficiency has not been the primary goal of healthcare coverage within the Swiss regulatory healthcare state despite rising costs. As another exceptional feature, Switzerland has diverged from the traditional path of judicial behavior in the regulatory state. This paper critically dissects how the Swiss Federal Court has become a crucial actor, imposing limits on access to healthcare and shaping decision-making criteria for social regulation, such as costbenefit and cost-impact analysis. Through this judicialization of limit-setting, the judiciary engages in an ongoing constitutional dialogue on the limits of the regulatory welfare state and its sustainability for the future.

show abstract

Section: Regulatory Standard Of Reasonable Carementioning

confidence: 99%