The Use of Economic Evaluation Tools in Essential Health Benefits Package Selection for Universal Health Coverage



The sustainable development goals launched in 2015 are a follow-up commitment to the successful Millennium Development Goals. Goal number 3 of ensuring “good health and well-being” is a target to ensure universal health coverage. Universal health coverage means the provision of quality services that meet the needs of populations without risking financial impoverishment in the process. The guaranteed minimum health services in every health system constitute the health benefits package (HBP), which should be explicit and be composed of services that represent the best value for money and guarantee the best return on investment. The objective of this study was to review the application of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and budget impact analysis in the development of HBP in low-to-middle income countries across the world.


A literature review using a systematic approach was used. A search of PubMed, Google Scholar, World Health Organization, and World Bank databases was made for articles outlining the development of HBP in low- and middle-income countries, and a narrative synthesis was used for analysis.


Results from processes in Armenia, Ethiopia, Kyrgyz Republic, Lebanon, and Malawi showed CEA and budget impact analysis as 2 criteria used in HBP development in a limited number of countries with either no reference to the two or no reporting from the others. Local CEA estimates and cost data limitations were the biggest challenges to efforts to use robust methods.


Sustained efforts are needed to understand and address the challenges to the use of economic evaluation in the development of HBPs.


Derek Mangoya Leela Barham Enos Moyo Perseverance Moyo Tafadzwa Dzinamarira

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on Update my browser now