Difference b/w Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effective Analysis

	Cost – Benefit Analysis	Cost – Effective Analysis
Outcome measured	Money gained Ratio of costs to ALL outcomes	Health units (e.g. DALYs, no. of lives saved) Ratio of the cost of one intervention to one defined outcome
Indices calculated	Cost-benefit ratio (CBR)	Health units per unit cost
Uses in health care	At executive level of government: considering proposals i.e. at the decision making level e.g. ranking during budgeting in health sector	1. Selecting the most cost effective intervention for a defined outcome 2. Evaluation of activities under the program
Advantages	Can be used to evaluate public expenditure programs aimed at producing different outcomes, even different sectors	Cannot compare activities aimed at different outcomes Primarily for comparing various clinical strategies aiming to deliver the same outcome
Disadvantages	1. Every health benefit is not measurable in terms of money. Hence not suitable when the outcomes cannot be expressed in monetary terms 2. CBA is comparatively more complex as every matter needs to be quantified and it also considers opportunity cost and time factor	1. Useful even when the health benefits cannot be converted in monetary terms 2. CEA is relatively easier as all the matters need not be quantified in monetary value

Original image

References:

WHO, 1974. Modern Management Methods and the Organization of Health Services; Geneva
WHO, 2006 . Guidelines for conducting cost–benefit analysis of household energy and health interventions; eds: Guy Hutton,Eva Rehfuess. WHO press, Geneva.
WHO, 2003. Who Guide to Cost- Effectiveness Analysis; Geneva
Park’s Textbook of Preventive and Community Medicine. 24th ed, 2017, Bhanot Publishers, Jabalpur
MIKAEL S, LARS H; A Comparison of Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Practice: Divergent Policy Practices in Sweden; Nordic Journal of Health Economics, Vol. 5 (2017), No. 2, pp. 41-53