Different Types Of Economic Evaluation Research Articles

Economic Evaluations of Music Therapy and Other Music-Based Interventions: A Scoping Review.

The cost-effectiveness of an intervention is an important factor in health care decisions about which health care services should be publicly funded and/or approved as an eligible intervention for private insurance coverage. Music therapy as a health profession lacks substantial research on the cost-effectiveness of its services and there is no overview of existing data. We therefore conducted a scoping review. To contextualize and focus the scope, we describe different types of economic evaluations (EEs) and characterize four types of music interventions. Following the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews, we systematically searched six databases (EBSCOHost, ProQuest, Web of Science, APA PsycNet, Scopus, and Prospero) in January 2023, and, after screening the initial 1,041 hits, 26 references were included in the review. The results consist of 19 completed and 7 planned EEs published between 1999 and 2022, mainly in the United States. The results show a heterogeneous picture with regard to: (a) the health economic methods used, ranging from cost analyses to cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs), and one social return on investment analysis; (b) the service users involved, ranging from neonatal intensive care patients to persons with dementia and care staff; (c) the outcomes and cost components examined in the respective studies; and (d) the type of study and the conclusions drawn from the results. Accordingly, this scoping review provides an up-to-date overview of health economic studies and identifies research gaps in the field of music interventions for health-related goals and aims to contribute to the discussion on this topic.

Economic evaluations of neglected tropical disease interventions in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol.

The objective of this systematic review is to provide an overview of economic evaluation studies of interventions for neglected tropical diseases in low- and/or middle-income countries. The majority of people most susceptible to neglected tropical diseases reside in low- and middle-income countries and suffer significant economic impact due to these diseases. The World Health Organization suggests utilizing a systematic and cross-cutting approach with multiple interventions to lessen the neglected tropical disease burden. Studies will be eligible for inclusion if they include economic evaluations of interventions for neglected tropical diseases and are conducted in low- and/or middle-income country settings. A preliminary search of MEDLINE (PubMed) was undertaken using MeSH terms, such as neglected tropical disease, economic evaluation, therapeutics, low- and/or middle-income countries . Two reviewers will screen titles and abstracts independently, followed by a full-text review against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved by discussion or with a third reviewer. To assess methodological quality, the JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be used. For economic evaluations, data will be extracted using the standardized JBI data extraction form. The Dominance Ranking Matrix will be used to summarize and compare the results of different types of economic evaluations. Cost per quality adjusted life year gained and cost per disability adjusted life year averted will be measures for economic evaluation. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence, such as resource use and costs. PROSPERO CRD42017070386.

Cost-effectiveness of a decentralized care model for managing multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol.

The purpose of this systematic review is to assess the available economic evidence of a decentralized care model compared to a centralized model for treating multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Diseases that affect physiological health create a burden on human livelihoods and the economy. There is a lack of studies examining the economic evaluation of MDR-TB across different countries. A preliminary search identified no published or ongoing reviews on MDR-TB in LMICs. Studies will be eligible if they include both patients receiving centralized care (ie, care provided by specialist centers through inpatient or outpatient services) and patients receiving decentralized care (ie, care provided by grassroots community workers in peripheral facilities or in the patients' residence) for MDR-TB in LMICs. Eligible studies will report economic evaluations of treatment for MDR-TB. A preliminary search of MEDLINE (PubMed) was undertaken using MeSH terms, such as MDR-TB, economic evaluation, therapeutics, LMICs . Two reviewers will independently screen the titles, abstracts, and full text against the inclusion criteria. Disagreements will be resolved through discussion or with a third reviewer. The JBI checklist for economic evaluations will be utilized to evaluate the methodological quality. Data will be extracted using a modified JBI data extraction form for economic evaluations. The Dominance Ranking Matrix, developed by JBI for economic evaluations, will be used to summarize and compare the results of different types of economic evaluations (cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit analysis, cost-utility analysis, or cost-minimization analysis). Cost per quality-adjusted life year gained and cost per disability-adjusted life year averted will be measures for economic evaluation. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach will be used to assess the certainty of economic evidence. PROSPERO CRD42022368696.

Health technology assessment: a framework.

In a time where there is growing pressure on healthcare budgets, there is increased scrutiny of new health technologies, their effectiveness, safety and costs.1 It is in this context that Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has become increasingly important. The purpose of HTA is to provide policymakers with evidence to inform decision-making and develop guidance on the reimbursement and administration of new health technologies in a national healthcare system. As such, HTA is regarded as a bridge between research evidence and health policy.2 HTA is a multidisciplinary process, encompassing diverse aspects such as medical, economic, organisational, social and ethical considerations. The term ‘health technology’ is used in its broader sense and, with it, we typically refer to any product or activity that is used to promote health in any way, for instance, by preventing or treating disease, improving rehabilitation, and long-term care.3 HTA can aid a national health system with making decisions on how to allocate the often limited healthcare funds to different health technologies. Healthcare systems are faced with many new and old health technologies and insufficient resources to fund all of these. The result is a concept known as ‘opportunity cost’, which describes the value of the achievable benefits forgone by funding one technology, which comes at the expense of another.4 HTA can help decide which health technologies best to fund. At its heart is often an economic evaluation that compares health technologies in terms of their costs, clinical effectiveness, side effects, impact on HRQoL, impact on organisations, among others. There are different types of economic evaluation and they can be distinguished by the outcomes that are considered in each (table 1).4 Cost analysis studies consider the costs associated …

A guide to economic evaluation: Methods for cost‐effectiveness analysis of person‐level data

The authors introduce economic evaluation with particular attention to cost-effectiveness analysis. They begin by establishing why health care decisions should be guided by economics. They then explore different types of economic evaluations. To illustrate how to conduct and evaluate a cost-effectiveness analysis, a hypothetical study about the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder with psychotherapy versus pharmacotherapy is considered. The authors conclude with recommendations for increasing the strength and relevance of economic evaluations.

Pharmacoeconomics: friend or foe?

The financial constraints faced by most health systems today make it necessary for manufacturers of new, expensive drugs to demonstrate value for money. This paper describes the different types of...

Quality of life assessment in clinical practice in haemophilia treatment

The modern management of haemophilia has greatly influenced not only survival of patients, their clinical symptoms and orthopaedic outcome but also their perceived quality of life (QoL). QoL measures recently became an essential part of clinical trials being one of the most important patient-rated outcomes (PROs). Moreover, QoL assessment is essential in pharmacoeconomics. In clinical trials, not only clinical outcomes but also the so-called PROs and health-economic outcomes are included. Different types of economic evaluations may be conducted in order to describe the economic burden of a disease condition, to determine the cost of care and to assess and evaluate alternative treatments in terms of both costs and effects as well as benefits and outcomes with the aim of optimizing the use of resources. For these evaluations, the following analyses are performed: descriptive cost of illness study, incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, incremental cost-utility analysis and incremental cost-benefit analysis. By contrast, PROs are derived from direct patient reports and they allow to evaluate the impact of a disease and its treatment on patients' well-being and functioning. PROs include health-related quality of life, patient preferences/utilities, treatment satisfaction and other PROs such as functional assessment, etc. Choosing a QoL measure, study- and instrument-related aspects have to be taken into account. Finally, QoL assessment will become a part of the regular clinical assessment of persons with haemophilia, in order to provide trustworthy data of perceived well-being to be compared over time and in order to assess treatment efficacy and quality of care.

An Introduction to Economic Evaluation: What's in a Name?

This paper describes the main types of economic evaluation techniques. To examine the strengths and limitations of different types of economic evaluations, we used a hypothetical example to review the reasoning underlying each method and to illustrate when it is appropriate to use each method. The choice of economic evaluation method reflects a decision about what should represent "success" and how success should be valued. Measures of benefit and cost must be considered systematically and simultaneously. Claiming that a new treatment is cost-effective requires making a value judgment based on the personal beliefs of the claimant. Even when cost and effect data are objective, a verdict of cost-effective is subjective. The conclusions of an economic study can change significantly, depending on which patient outcome is used to measure success. Clinicians must be sure that important patient outcomes are not excluded from economic evaluations. Economic evaluation is a process designed to produce an estimate rather than a decision. New treatment can be more costly and still be cost-effective (if the extra benefit is valued more than the extra cost to produce it). However, since economic evaluation does not explicitly consider a decision maker's available budget, a new treatment can be deemed cost-effective but too expensive to approve.

Costs and consequences of hip fracture occurrence in old age: An economic perspective

Purpose: To summarize the reported short- and long-term costs associated with hip fracture occurrence in old age, based on a systematic literature review of published studies. A further aim is to provide a clinician-oriented discussion of the different types of economic evaluations, with an emphasis on studies that examined potential determinants of the costs of care after hip fracture.Method: Literature review.Main results: Even after the initial hospitalization, hip fractures continue to generate significant costs throughout the one-year period after discharge, but particularly during the first three months. Cost estimates based on data obtained prospectively from hip-fracture patients and matched controls showed that the costs associated with the treatment of hip-fracture patients are about three times greater than those resulting from the treatment of age and residence-matched controls without a fracture. Two-fifths of these excess costs are incurred during the first three months following hospital discharge. Increasing age at the time of injury and living in an institution before the fracture are among the most important determinants of an increased cost of care after hospital discharge. Programs that focus on continuity of care, adopt a multidisciplinary approach, and accelerate rehabilitation have shown to be able to reduce the cost of care after hip fracture.Conclusions: This review emphasizes the importance of current and future interventions to decrease the incidence of hip fracture. While the current review cannot provide definite answers to the questions of cost containment, our review provides critically important evidence about the need to base health policy decisions on empirical observations. Comprehensive economic analyses of financial costs and health outcomes are needed to develop cost-effective strategies.

Economic evidence for evidence-based practice.

To explicate (a) the types of economic analyses available to nurses, (b) the measurement of costs in different types of economic evaluations, (c) recommendations for standardization, and (d) the assessment of economic evaluations for evidence-based practice. Five types of economic analyses are reviewed. Recommendations for standardization of cost-effectiveness analyses are included as well as a worksheet for use in critiquing economic evaluations for validity and applicability to clinical settings. Limited knowledge and a lack of consistent approaches to economic analyses are evident in the nursing and health care literature. However, nurses have not contributed to the conduct of rigorous economic evaluations or research to the extent found in other health care disciplines. Basing nursing practice on the best available evidence is now the expected standard of care. Applying economic evidence to practice requires understanding the methods used to conduct economic evaluations and to analyze the rigor of such evaluations.

Economic analysis of randomized, controlled trials.

To facilitate the comparison of different treatment strategies, measures have been developed that bring together clinical, quality-of-life, and economic outcomes into summary measures such as the quality-adjusted life year, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility ratios. A number of different types of economic evaluations have been developed, including cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analyses. Performance of economic analyses in association with randomized, controlled trials (RCT) has gained increasing enthusiasm in recent years. However, economic measures in RCTs are often outcomes of secondary interest and associated with frequent missing data and inadequate sample size. Variability in the cost measures used and the lack of agreement on clinically meaningful cost differences further limit the conclusions derived from such studies. Economic analyses should be limited to large trials with important trade-offs between efficacy and cost. The strengths and limitations of such analyses are discussed, and guidelines are offered for proper economic analyses in randomized, controlled trials.

Economic evaluation and end-stage renal disease: From basics to bedside

Economic evaluation is the comparative analysis of alternative health care interventions in terms of their relative costs (resource use) and effectiveness (health effects). High-quality studies of economic evaluation have been increasingly published in medical journals and read by clinicians, although publication of these studies in nephrology journals has been a more recent phenomenon. This article shows how the basic principles of economics can be applied to health care through the use of economic evaluation. Different types of economic evaluation are discussed, and pitfalls common to such studies are identified. A simple framework is introduced that can be used to interpret the results of economic evaluations. Using this framework, selected therapies for patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) are categorized to highlight therapies that are very efficient, encourage their use, and draw attention to therapies in current use that are less effective and more expensive (ie, less efficient) than alternative therapy. Using examples pertinent to care of the patient with ESRD, we show how economic evaluation can be used to link medical outcomes, quality of life, and costs in a common index for multiple therapies with disparate outcome measures. This article highlights the need for clinical studies and economic evaluations of therapies in ESRD for which the effects of the therapy on health outcomes and/or costs are unknown.

10.1016/j.ohc.2006.02.013

Economic evaluation is an increasingly important component of health and medical care policy making although it continues to be met with some resistance. Many fields of medical care services and public health have extensive economic evaluation literatures. In ophthalmology, the literature is less well developed and there is an ongoing discussion of the most appropriate methods. This article outlines different types of economic evaluations providing examples on their potential use in ophthalmic care decision making, reviews three articles in the brief recent literature on the cost-effectiveness of ophthalmic anesthesia and cataract surgery in the United States with a focus on explaining methods that were used, and discusses ways in which research in this area might be moved forward.

The economic perspective.

The rationale for the economic perspective on screening is presented and the particular relevance of economic evaluation highlighted. The principles of economic evaluation are described in terms of measuring and valuing the costs and outcomes associated with screening. The different types of economic evaluation are described with discussion of data sources. The problematic issues associated with time preferences and discounting and with the measurement and valuation of outcomes other than true positives are discussed. Issues associated with antenatal screening, in particular the inclusion of averted costs due to the termination of an affected pregnancy and the inclusion and valuation of the unborn child's utility, are also raised.

Economic evaluation and health care. What does it mean?

Ever since the concept of value for money in health care was introduced into the NHS, economic terms and jargon have become part of our everyday lives--but do we understand what the different types of economic evaluation all mean, particularly those that sound similar to the uninitiated? This article introduces readers to the purpose of economic evaluation, and briefly explains the differences between cost-minimisation analysis (used when the outcomes of the procedures being compared are the same); cost-effectiveness analysis (used when the outcomes may vary, but can be expressed in common natural units, such as mm Hg for treatments of hypertension); cost-utility analysis (used when outcomes do vary--for example, quality of life scales); and cost-benefit analysis (used when a monetary value is being placed on services received). Further articles will deal with each one in more detail.

Outcome measurement in economic evaluations of growth factors

There are several ways of measuring outcome in an economic evaluation of filgrastim therapy. These measures imply different types of economic evaluation. In all cases, the filgrastim therapy is compared with no filgrastim therapy. Since different therapeutic strategies are connected with uncertain consequences, decision trees are helpful analytical tools. The potential implications of different types of economic evaluations are illustrated with a simple decision tree.