Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards Checklist Research Articles

Economic evaluations of therapeutic drug monitoring interventions in acute hospital-based settings: A systematic review.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aims to optimize drug therapy. As demand on health resources increases, and the technology underpinning TDM becomes more sophisticated, the economic benefits of TDM in hospitals is unclear. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the economic evidence that could be used to support investment in TDM in hospital settings. In so doing, we sought to provide guidance for future economic evaluations. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, Econlit and NHS Economic Evaluation databases were searched (inception to December 2022) for economic evaluations of hospital-based TDM. Two authors reviewed the studies and extracted data. Overall quality of economic analysis reporting was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Ten prospective studies (including six randomized studies) and nine retrospective studies were eligible. Overall study reporting was poor, publications meeting a median (range) of 61% (46-82%) of CHEERS checklist criteria. An antimicrobial TDM intervention for adult patients was the focus of most studies (n = 18). Variable clinical outcomes were reported, and length of stay was the primary economic outcome for most studies (n = 13). The majority of studies determined that TDM was economically and clinically favourable (n = 14), four studies reporting a cost-reduction in patient sub-populations. Significant improvements in both economic and clinical outcomes may be realized with TDM interventions, particularly when targeted to complex patient populations. Attainment of therapeutic target could serve as a feasible surrogate measure of benefit for hospital-based TDM interventions. However, systematic reporting of economic outcomes is needed to inform investment decisions.

Critical Analysis of Economic Evaluation of the Childhood Rotavirus Vaccination in Low- and Lower-Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review

ObjectivesTo identify, critically appraise, and summarize the use of different methods and results of economic evaluations to assess the efficiency of rotavirus vaccination programs in low- and lower-middle-income countries. MethodsA systematic literature search was performed in 3 bibliographic databases, including PubMed, ProQuest, Cochrane Library, and Science Direct (Elsevier) journal website, using key search terms. The study selection process was based on predefined inclusion criteria. The search results were presented using the research flow diagram based on guidelines of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis). The quality assessment of the selected studies was carried out using the CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) checklist. ResultsA total of 21 studies were selected for review. All the studies, except 1, reported rotavirus vaccination to be a cost-effective intervention and a high-impact strategy to reduce substantial rotavirus disease burden. A decision analysis model was considered appropriate by all studies, although there were variabilities in the analytic horizon used. Lack of country-level data was highlighted by most studies. Multiples of gross domestic product of respective countries were used as a threshold to interpret cost-effectiveness. ConclusionsRotavirus vaccination was found to be cost-efficient in most settings, including complex humanitarian emergencies. The use of thresholds for interpreting incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and lack of local-level disease incidence and cost of illness data remains a point of contention. Lack of reporting probabilistic sensitivity analysis renders limited robustness to study results.

Systematic review of economic evaluations of aromatase inhibitors in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: quality evaluation

BackgroundBreast cancer (BC) is a leading cause of premature death in women and the most expensive malignancy to treat. Since the introduction of targeted therapies has resulted in changes to BC therapy practices, health economic evaluations have become more important in this area. Taking generic medications, Aromatase Inhibitors (AIs), as a case study, we conducted a systematic review of the recent economic evaluations of AIs for estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer patients and evaluated the quality of these health economic studies.ObjectiveTo systematically review and examine the quality of the available economic studies of AIs in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.MethodsA literature search was performed using six relevant databases (MEDLINE, Embase, Database of s of Reviews of Effects, Health Technology Assessment Database, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, and SCOPUS) from January 2010 to July 2021. All economic studies were independently assessed by two reviewers using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist to evaluate the quality of the economic evaluations. This systematic review is registered in the PROSPERO database. To compare the different currencies used in these studies, all costs were converted to international dollars (2021).ResultsA total of eight studies were included in the review; six (75%) were performed from the healthcare providers’ perspective. They were conducted in seven different countries, and all were model-based analyses using Markov models. Six (75%) considered both Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs) and Life Years (LY) outcomes, and all costs were derived from national databases. When compared to tamoxifen, AIs were generally cost-effective in postmenopausal women. Only half of the studies addressed the increased mortality following adverse events, and none mentioned medication adherence. For the quality assessment, six studies fulfilled 85% of the CHEERS checklist requirements and are deemed good quality.ConclusionAIs are generally considered cost-effective compared to tamoxifen in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. The overall quality of the included studies was between high and average but characterizing heterogeneity, and distributional effects should be considered in any future economic evaluation studies of AIs. Studies should include adherence and adverse effects profiles to provide evidence to facilitate decision-making among policymakers.

Were economic evaluations well reported for the newly listed oncology drugs in China’s national reimbursement drug list

PurposeTo assess the reporting quality of published economic evaluations of the negotiated oncology drugs listed for China’s 2020 National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL).MethodsA comprehensive search was conducted to identify economic evaluation studies of negotiated oncology drugs listed in China’s 2020 NRDL using the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, SinoMed, and WanFang Database up to March 31, 2021. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist scored the reporting quality between 0 and 100. A linear regression analysis was employed to examine the influence of various characteristics on the reporting quality scores.ResultsEighty papers were included in the study, with the majority published during the past decade. Furthermore, more than half of the articles (57.5%, or 46 out of 80) were written in English. The average CHEERS score was 74.63 ± 12.75 and ranged from 43.48 to 93.75. The most inadequately reported items included choice of model, characterization of heterogeneity, and discussion, as well as currency, price date and conversion. Higher scores were associated with articles published from 2019 to 2021 and English publications.ConclusionThe economic evaluation studies of negotiated oncology drugs listed in 2020 NRDL had moderate reporting quality. The Chinese economic evaluation publications could improve the reporting quality if the CHEERS checklist is consistently implemented. Also, the Chinese journals maybe explore introducing a reporting standard for economic evaluations.

PD08 A Systematic Review Of Reporting Quality Of Economic Evaluations In TCM In NRDL Of China Based On CHEERS

IntroductionTraditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has become a common kind of health care in several countries, with increasing demands. This review aimed to appraise the reporting quality of economic evaluations of TCM in the National Reimbursement Drug List (NRDL) of China (2020 version), based on the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement.MethodsThe reporting quality of included economic evaluations was assessed by two independent reviewers using the CHEERS statement.ResultsA total of 360 articles were retrieved, but only 38 economic evaluations met the inclusion criteria. No articles were compliant with all items of the CHEERS checklist. On average, the included economic evaluations satisfactorily met 10.93 of the CHEERS items (51.31%). The least reported CHEERS checklist items included: “Characterizing heterogeneity”, “Conflicts of interest”, “Discount rate”, and “Study perspective”, with an average score of 0.00, 0.05, 0.08, and 0.16, respectively.ConclusionsThe economic evaluation of TCM is still at an early stage, with an urgent need for improving the reporting quality. To promote the reporting quality of economic evaluations and further development of TCM, multiple measures focusing on reporting formula, policy, training, and new methodology are required.

Health Care Economic Burden of Treatment and Rehabilitation for Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction: A Systematic Review.

The clinical, social, and economic impacts of neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction (NLUTD) on individuals and health care systems are thought to be immense, yet the true costs of care are unknown. The aims of this study are to illuminate the global costs related to the current state of care for NLUTD. A systematic review of the literature was performed using MEDLINE, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and the Cochrane Specialized Urology and Incontinence Registers. Studies reporting the health care costs of NLUTD were identified. All steps of the review were performed by 2 independent reviewers. Costs were converted to 2022 U.S. dollars and reported for different categories of services. A total of 13 studies were included in the final review (12 from high-income economy, and 1 from an upper-middle-income economy). Routine maintenance care varied notably across studies in terms of included services. Annual supportive costs ranged from $2,039.69 to $12,219.07 with 1 study estimating lifetime costs of $112,774 when complications were considered. There were limited data on the costs of care from the patient's perspective. However, catheters and absorbent aids were estimated to be among the costliest categories of expenditure during routine care. More invasive and reconstructive treatments were associated with significant costs, ranging between $18,057 and $55,873. NLUTD incurs a variety of health care expenditures ranging from incontinence supplies to hospitalizations for management of complications and leads to a significant burden for health care systems over the patient's lifetime. Approaches to NLUTD that focus on functional rehabilitation and restoration, rather than on management of complications, may prove to be a less costly and more effective alternative.

A Systematic Review of the Cost-effectiveness of Perampanel in the Treatment of Epilepsy

A Systematic Review of the Cost-effectiveness of Perampanel in the Treatment of Epilepsy

A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations Conducted for Interventions to Screen, Treat, and Manage Retinopathy of Prematurity (ROP) in the United States, United Kingdom, and Canada

ABSTRACT Purpose A systematic literature review (SLR) of economic evaluations (EE) conducted for interventions to screen, treat, and manage retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) in the United States (US), United Kingdom (UK), and Canada was performed. Methods The SLR accessed the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Health Business Elite, Econ. Lit, NHS EED, and Google Scholar databases over the period 1st January 2000 to 4th August 2021. The key Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) search terms used included: Retinopathy of prematurity, Cost-effectiveness analysis, Cost-utility analysis, Cost of illness, Cost-benefit analysis, Cost minimization analysis, Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, Quality adjusted life years, return on investment, burden of illness, disability adjusted life years, and Economic evaluation. Screening was conducted using Covidence, and the risk of bias was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Data extraction was performed using MS Excel. Results 1,527 articles were examined with nine (9) papers identified, one (1) from the UK; two (2) from Canada and six (6) from the US. Cost-effectiveness analysis was the main form of EE conducted (n = 5) and telemedicine screening (n = 3) was found to be highly cost-effective for ROP with the ICER values ranging from £446 to £4,240 per Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) in 2021 figures. 73% of included studies complied with the CHEERS checklist for EE. Conclusions ROP screening and treatment strategies reviewed were highly cost-effective. This review may assist eye health policymakers in planning nationwide screening and treatment programs to combat vision loss and blindness due to ROP.

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Anti-TNF Therapy in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review.

Infliximab and adalimumab are monoclonal antibodies against tumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) used to manage inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) has been proven to prevent immunogenicity, to achieve better long-term clinical results and to save costs in IBD treatment. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review on cost-effectiveness analyses of studies that apply TDM of anti-TNF in IBD and to provide a critical analysis of the best scientific knowledge available in the literature. The quality of the included studies was assessed using Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). Cost-effectiveness of the TDM strategies was presented as total costs, cost savings, quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Thirteen studies that examined the health economics of TDM of anti-TNF in IBD from 2013 to 2021 were included. Eight of them (61.5%) achieved a score between 17 and 23 on the CHEERS checklist. The comparison between the TDM strategy and an empirical strategy was cost saving. The ICER between reactive TDM and an empirical strategy was dominated (favorable) by reactive TDM, whereas the ICER value for proactive TDM compared to an empirical strategy ranged from EUR 56,845 to 3,901,554. This systematic review demonstrated that a TDM strategy is cost-effective or cost-saving in IBD.

A systematic review of scope and quality of health economic evaluations conducted in Ethiopia.

There has been an increased interest in health technology assessment and economic evaluations for health policy in Ethiopia over the last few years. In this systematic review, we examined the scope and quality of healthcare economic evaluation studies in Ethiopia. We searched seven electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, Econlit, York CRD databases and CEA Tufts) from inception to May 2021 to identify published full health economic evaluations of a health-related intervention or programme in Ethiopia. This was supplemented with forward and backward citation searches of included articles, manual search of key government websites, the Disease Control Priorities-Ethiopia project and WHO-CHOICE programme. The quality of reporting of economic evaluations was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The extracted data were grouped into subcategories based on the subject of the economic evaluation, organized into tables and reported narratively. This review identified 34 full economic evaluations conducted between 2009 and 2021. Around 14 (41%) of studies focussed on health service delivery, 8 (24%) on pharmaceuticals, vaccines and devices, and 4 (12%) on public-health programmes. The interventions were mostly preventive in nature and focussed on communicable diseases (n = 19; 56%) and maternal and child health (n = 6; 18%). Cost-effectiveness ratios varied widely from cost-saving to more than US $37 313 per life saved depending on the setting, perspectives, types of interventions and disease conditions. While the overall quality of included studies was judged as moderate (meeting 69% of CHEERS checklist), only four out of 27 cost-effectiveness studies characterized heterogeneity. There is a need for building local technical capacity to enhance the design, conduct and reporting of health economic evaluations in Ethiopia.

Pharmacogenetic testing for adverse drug reaction prevention: systematic review of economic evaluations and the appraisal of quality matters for clinical practice and implementation

BackgroundGenetic testing has potential roles in identifying whether an individual would have risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from a particular medicine. Robust cost-effectiveness results on genetic testing would be useful for clinical practice and policy decision-making on allocating resources effectively. This study aimed to update a systematic review on economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to prevent ADRs and critically appraise the quality of reporting and sources of evidence for model input parameters.MethodsWe searched studies through Medline via PubMed, Scopus and CRD’s NHS Economic Evaluation up to October 2019. Studies investigating polymorphism-based pharmacogenetic testing, which guided drug therapies to prevent ADRs, using economic evaluation methods were included. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines and the quality of data sources using the hierarchy of evidence developed by Cooper et al.ResultsFifty-nine economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to avoid drug-induced ADRs were found between 2002 and 2018. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses were the most common methods of economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing. Most studies complied with the CHEERS checklist, except for single study-based economic evaluations which did not report uncertainty analysis (78%). There was a lack of high-quality evidence not only for estimating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing, but also baseline clinical data. About 14% of the studies obtained clinical effectiveness data of testing from a meta-analysis of case-control studies with direct comparison, which was not listed in the hierarchy of evidence used.ConclusionsOur review suggested that future single study-based economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing should report uncertainty analysis, as this could significantly affect the robustness of economic evaluation results. A specific ranking system for the quality of evidence is needed for the economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing of ADRs. Differences in parameters, methods and outcomes across studies, as well as population-level and system-level differences, may lead to the difficulty of comparing cost-effectiveness results across countries.

A scoping review of cost-effectiveness analyses of school-based interventions for caries.

The aims of this study were to: identify the evidence on cost-effectiveness of school-based interventions for caries prevention globally up to 2019; summarize key characteristics of interventions applied within this setting; summarize the reporting quality of previous studies; and to identify and analyse knowledge gaps. A scoping review of published literature on the cost-effectiveness of school-based interventions to prevent child tooth decay was conducted. A search in Medline, Cinahl and Embase was performed with no date restriction. Reporting quality of the included studies was assessed against Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 738 records identified in the initial search, 15 studies met the pre-specified inclusion criteria. The majority were published after 2011 (n=9,) and applied to high-income countries (n=12). Nearly 80% of the studies assessed the cost-effectiveness of the interventions based on topical fluoride therapies and fissure sealants at school premises. Although, the outcome measures differed across the studies, almost all the caries preventive interventions were cost-saving or cost-effective when compared with usual care. Compliance with the CHEERS checklist differed. There is evidence to suggest that school-based caries preventive interventions are cost-effective, and in some cases cost-saving. Further evidence is required from low- to middle-income countries to confirm the generalizability of these findings. Future studies should consider adopting Quality Adjusted Life Years as a generic outcome measure that would enable the cost-effectiveness findings to be compared across different types of interventions and diseases. Improved standardization and quality of reporting are also required.

A Systematic Review of Cost-Effectiveness of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter Inhibitors for Type 2 Diabetes.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are the most recently approved class of drugs (since 2012) for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but their economic merits have yet been fully confirmed. The objective of this review was to evaluate the most updated evidence that examined the cost-effectiveness of SGLT2i for T2DM. We systematically searched Medline (PubMed), EMBASE, and Web of Science for eligible articles from January 1, 2011, to October 31, 2019, using combinations of search words. A supplementary search using reference lists of eligible articles and other review articles was also performed. A multistage screening process was carried out with duplicates removal, abstract screening, and full-text reading to confirm eligibility. Two reviewers independently screened the eligible articles and assessed reporting quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. A total of 24 studies were included in the final review. All studies showed good quality according to the CHEERS checklist (scored 21-24). Seven studies compared SGLT2i vs. dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), 3 studies compared SGLT2i vs. sulfonylureas (SU), 3 compared SGLT2i vs. glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), 2 compared SGLT2i vs. SGLT2i, 3 compared SGLT2i vs. other antidiabetic therapies including thiazolidinediones (TZD), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (AGI) or insulin, and 5 compared SGLT2i vs. standard care/metformin. Most studies concluded SGLT2i was cost-effective relative to its comparator except GLP-1 RA, where two studies suggested GLP-1 RA was the favorable treatment option relative to SGLT2i. The literature demonstrated that SGLT2i may be cost-effective compared to many antidiabetic therapies including DPP-4i, SU, TZD, AGI, insulin, and standard care .

Economic Evaluations Informed Exclusively by Real World Data: A Systematic Review.

Economic evaluations using Real World Data (RWD) has been increasing in the very recent years, however, this source of information has several advantages and limitations. The aim of this review was to assess the quality of full economic evaluations (EE) developed using RWD. A systematic review was carried out through articles from the following databases: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Included were studies that employed RWD for both costs and effectiveness. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Of the 14,011 studies identified, 93 were included. Roughly half of the studies were carried out in a hospital setting. The most frequently assessed illnesses were neoplasms while the most evaluated interventions were pharmacological. The main source of costs and effects of RWD were information systems. The most frequent clinical outcome was survival. Some 47% of studies met at least 80% of CHEERS criteria. Studies were conducted with samples of 100–1000 patients or more, were randomized, and those that reported bias controls were those that fulfilled most CHEERS criteria. In conclusion, fewer than half the studies met 80% of the CHEERS checklist criteria.

Economic evaluations of screening strategies for the early detection of colorectal cancer in the average-risk population: A systematic literature review.

BackgroundColorectal cancer (CRC) screening has proven effective in reducing CRC mortality. This study aimed to systematically review, and evaluate the reporting quality, of the economic evidence regarding CRC screening in average-risk individuals.MethodsDatabases searched included Medline, EMBASE, National Health Service Economic Evaluation, Database of s of Reviews of Effects, Cost-Effectiveness Analysis registry, EconLit, and Health Technology Assessment database. Eligible studies were cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses comparing CRC screening strategies in average-risk individuals, published in English or Spanish, between January 2012 and November 2018. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.ResultsOf 1,993 publications initially retrieved, 477 were excluded by duplicate review, 1,449 by title/abstract review, and 34 by full-text review. Finally, 33 publications were included in the qualitative synthesis. Most studies were conducted in Europe (36,4%), followed by United States (24,2%) and Asia (24,2%). The main screening modalities considered were fecal immunochemical tests (70%), colonoscopy (67%), guaiac fecal occult blood test (42%) and flexible sigmoidoscopy (30%). In most studies, CRC screening was deemed cost-effective compared to no screening. Sensitivity analyses indicated that cost of CRC screening tests, adherence to screening, screening test sensitivity, and cost of CRC treatment had the greatest impact on cost-effectiveness results across studies. The majority of studies (73%) adequately reported at least 50% of the items included in the CHEERS checklist. Least well reported items included setting, study perspective, discount rate, model choice, and methods to identify effectiveness data or to estimate resource use and costs.ConclusionsCRC screening is an efficient alternative to no screening. Nevertheless, it is not possible to conclude which strategy should be preferred for population-based screening programs. Although we observed an overall good adherence to CHEERS recommendations, there is still room for improvement in economic evaluations reporting in this field.

PBI75 REVIEW OF ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS FOR GENE THERAPIES:ARE WE READY FOR THE FUTURE?

High prices asked upfront for novel one-off gene therapies accompanied by uncertain long-term value claims raise concerns around reimbursement and affordability for Health Technology Assessments (HTAs) and payers. Economic evaluations (EEs) are commonly used to inform these reimbursement decisions. This study aimed to examine economic evaluation studies of Gene Therapies (GTs) and to provide an overview of the quality of the economic evidence available for use in decision making. We conducted a systematic review of peer reviewed literature to identify published EEs in English between 2007 and 2019. Data extracted from EEs included model, input and outcomes characteristics. Quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. A narrative analysis was performed in which we discussed methodology, assumptions and quality of EEs, as well as use and implications in decision-making. The systematic review yielded seven EEs of gene therapies. All EEs were cost-utility analyses and scored satisfactory to good on the CHEERS checklist. Five EEs modeled ‘traditional’ upfront payment and two an outcome-based payment scheme. Four studies concluded GTs were not cost-effective. Three EEs further explored different assumptions around long-term survival, alternative payment schemes (annuity-based payment, pay for performance) and their effect on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio using extensive subgroup analyses or scenario’s. EEs with scenario analyses were considered most informative for decision making, providing insights in the effect of assumptions and feasibility alternative approaches. Although the quality of an EE may be considered good, their informativeness for HTA and payers and policy makers can be limited. We therefore recommend including scenario analyses in gene therapy EEs, simulating different effectiveness assumptions, payment scheme’s or survival extrapolation methods. With the introduction of new therapies comes the need to explore use and appropriateness of our evidence generation tools, including EEs, to inform our decisions.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of childhood cancer treatment in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review

IntroductionA major barrier to improving childhood cancer survival is the perception that paediatric oncology services are too costly for low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) health systems. We conducted a systematic...

Cost-Effectiveness of Treatment Options for Neuropathic Pain: a Systematic Review.

Neuropathic pain significantly reduces an individual's quality of life and places a significant economic burden on society. As such, many cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) have been published for treatments available for neuropathic pain. The primary objective of this systematic review was to provide a detailed summary of the estimates of cost-effectiveness from published CEAs comparing available treatments for neuropathic pain. The secondary objectives were to identify the key drivers of cost-effectiveness and to assess the quality of published CEAs in neuropathic pain. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane CENTRAL and seven other databases to identify CEAs reporting the costs, health benefits (e.g., quality-adjusted life-years or disability-adjusted life-years) and summary statistics, such as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, of treatments for neuropathic pain. We excluded studies reporting diseases other than neuropathic pain, those for which the full text was not available (e.g., conference abstracts), studies not written in English or not published in peer-reviewed journals, and narrative reviews, editorials and opinion papers. Titles and abstract reviews, full-text reviews, and data extraction were all performed by two independent reviewers, with disagreement resolved by a third reviewer. Mean costs, health benefits, and summary statistics were reportedand qualitatively compared across studies, stratified by time horizon. Drivers of cost-effectiveness were assessed using reported one-way sensitivity analyses. The quality of allincluded studies was evaluated using the Tufts CEA Registry Quality Score and study reporting using the CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) checklist. A total of 22 studies were identified and included in this systematic review. Included studies were heterogeneous in the treatments compared, methodology and design, perspectives, and time horizons considered, making cross-study comparisons difficult. No single treatment was consistently the most cost-effective across all studies, but tricyclic antidepressants were the preferred treatment at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $US50,000 per quality-adjusted life-year in several studies with a short time horizon and a US payer perspective. Among the 14 studies reporting one-way sensitivity analyses, drivers of cost-effectiveness included utility values for health states and the likelihood of pain relief with treatment. The quality of the identified CEAs was moderate to high, and overall reporting largely met CHEERS recommendations. To assess drivers of cost-effectiveness and quality, weonlyincluded studies with the full text available and thus excludedsome CEAsthat reported cost-effectiveness results. The heterogeneity of the included studies meant that the study results could not be synthesized and comparison across studies was limited. Though many pulished studies have evaluated the cost-effectiveness of treatments for neuropathic pain, significant heterogeneity between CEAs prevented synthesis of the results. Standardized methodology and improved reporting would allow for more reliable comparisons across studies.

PP10 Quality Of Reporting Economic Evaluations In Rehabilitation Research

IntroductionEconomic evaluations are a growing field of interest in the rehabilitation area. Research has questioned the quality of reporting of health economic evaluations. Poor reporting hinders the ability to provide accurate information for health care decision making. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to document on overall reporting quality of the published literature for rehabilitation economic evaluations; to identify if reporting quality has improved in health economic evaluations within the field of rehabilitation therapy since the publication of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS); and to identify factors that could influence the reporting trends.MethodsWe searched databases for economical evaluations performed in the rehabilitation area published between 2013 and 2018. Study selection was performed by two independent reviewers using Covidence software. Data extraction was conducted by one reviewer using Microsoft Excel and independently verified by another reviewer. The quality of reporting was evaluated independently by two reviewers using the CHEERS checklist.ResultsThe search of the literature resulted in a total of 2195 published articles. Of these, 117 were considered to be potentially relevant. Independent review of these 117 articles led to the inclusion of 88 articles. This study is ongoing and complete results will be presented at the conference. Fifty papers have been analyzed in full. In general, the quality of reporting of the economical evaluations in the rehabilitation field was poor. The total mean and median for the CHEERS checklist was 17 points (out of 25) (range 8-24). Most of the analyzed studies did not report important methodological features of the economical evaluation as evaluated by the CHEERS checklist.ConclusionsThe quality of reporting of economic evaluations in the rehabilitation field is poor and inconsistent. Commonly the methods of the analyzed studies are under reported, thereby creating challenges in determining whether the information presented is sound.

Economic Evaluations of Guideline-Based Care for Chronic Wounds: a Systematic Review

The aim of this study was to review all published economic evaluations of guideline-based care for chronic wounds and to assess how useful these studies are for decision making in health services. Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) were searched on April 16th, 2018. We included studies that evaluated the economic impact and health outcomes associated with implementing evidence-based guidelines as a bundle of care for the prevention and/or treatment of chronic wounds. Information was extracted from each eligible study and organized by the type of chronic wound. The quality of published economic evaluation studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS). A total of 24 economic evaluation studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 applied decision analytic models. The compliance with the CHEERS checklist ranged between 43 and 83%. We may have missed some economic evaluation studies despite the use of broad search terms. The quality assessment was conducted based on judgment. Using the CHEERS checklist may reflect the way evaluations were reported rather than conducted. We found that guideline-based care may be cost-saving or cost-effective in most circumstances. The quality and usefulness of reviewed studies for decision making were variable. Better information and higher-quality economic evaluations will increase decision makers' confidence to promote guideline-based care. PROSPERO CRD42017051859.