Types Of Economic Evaluations Research Articles

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.

Cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation prior to elective surgery: a systematic review of economic evaluations

BackgroundPrehabilitation aims at enhancing patients’ functional capacity and overall health status to enable them to withstand a forthcoming stressor like surgery. Our aim was to synthesise the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery compared with usual preoperative care.MethodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, the CRD database, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO ICTRP and the dissertation databases OADT and DART. Studies comparing prehabilitation for patients with elective surgery to usual preoperative care were included if they reported cost outcomes. All types of economic evaluations (EEs) were included. The primary outcome of the review was cost-effectiveness based on cost–utility analyses (CUAs).The risk of bias of trial-based EEs was assessed with the Cochrane risk of bias 2 tool and the ROBINS-I tool and the credibility of model-based EEs with the ISPOR checklist. Methodological quality of full EEs was assessed using the CHEC checklist. The EEs’ results were synthesised narratively using vote counting based on direction of effect.ResultsWe included 45 unique studies: 25 completed EEs and 20 ongoing studies. Of the completed EEs, 22 were trial-based and three model-based, corresponding to four CUAs, three cost-effectiveness analyses, two cost–benefit analyses, 12 cost–consequence analyses and four cost-minimization analyses. Three of the four trial-based CUAs (75%) found prehabilitation cost-effective, i.e. more effective and/or less costly than usual care. Overall, 16/25 (64.0%) EEs found prehabilitation cost-effective. When excluding studies of insufficient credibility/critical risk of bias, this number reduced to 14/23 (60.9%). In 8/25 (32.0%), cost-effectiveness was unclear, e.g. because prehabilitation was more effective and more costly, and in one EE prehabilitation was not cost-effective.ConclusionsWe found some evidence that prehabilitation for patients awaiting elective surgery is cost-effective compared to usual preoperative care. However, we suspect a relevant risk of publication bias, and most EEs were of high risk of bias and/or low methodological quality. Furthermore, there was relevant heterogeneity depending on the population, intervention and methods. Future EEs should be performed over a longer time horizon and apply a more comprehensive perspective.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42020182813.

Economic evaluations for intensive care unit randomised clinical trials in Australia and New Zealand: Practical recommendations for researchers

ObjectivesEconomic evaluations of intensive care unit (ICU) interventions have specific considerations, including how to cost ICU stays and accurately measure quality of life in survivors. The aim of this article was to develop best practice recommendations for economic evaluations alongside future ICU randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Review methodsWe collated our experience based on expert consensus across several recent economic evaluations to provide best-practice, practical recommendations for researchers conducting economic evaluations alongside RCTs in the ICU. Recommendations were structured according to the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) Task Force Report. ResultsWe discuss recommendations across the components of economic evaluations, including: types of economic evaluation, the population and sample size, study perspective, comparators, time horizon, choice of health outcomes, measurement of effectiveness, measurement and valuation of quality of life, estimating resources and costs, analytical methods, and the increment cost-effectiveness ratio. We also provide future directions for research with regard to developing more robust economic evaluations for the ICU. ConclusionEconomic evaluations should be built alongside ICU RCTs and should be designed a priori using appropriate follow-up and data collection to capture patient-relevant outcomes. Further work is needed to improve the quality of data available for linkage in Australia as well as developing costing methods for the ICU and appropriate quality of life measurements.

Scoping review of economic evaluations of assistive technology globally

ABSTRACT The paper presents a scoping review of existing economic evaluations of assistive technology (AT). The study methodology utilized a PRISMA flow approach with final included studies that met an adapted PICOS framework. Types of economic evaluations employed, study type and rigor and domains of AT impact were considered and analyzed. The economic evaluations in this study included 13 CBA, 9 CMA, 18 CEAs and 10 CUA. The majority of studies (32 studies in total) mentioned or recorded that AT investment, access and/or usage had impacts on the domain of both informal and formal health care. Specifically, care costs, time, and resources were affected. Our study has found that current AT economic evaluations are limited. This study advocates for a wider use of robust alternative evaluation and appraisal methodologies that can highlight AT value and which would subsequently provide further evidence that may make governments more willing to invest in and shape AT markets.

ATA2021ATA2021 Annual Conference & Expo(Virtual*)Tuesdays and Thursdays in June 2021(ABSTRACTS)

ATA2021ATA2021 Annual Conference & Expo(Virtual*)Tuesdays and Thursdays in June 2021(ABSTRACTS)

Development of a pharmacoeconomic registry: an example using hormonal contraceptives

BackgroundDisease-specific registries, documenting costs and probabilities from pharmacoeconomic studies along with health state utility values from quality-of-life studies could serve as a resource to guide researchers in evaluating the published literature and in the conduct of future economic evaluations for their own research. Registries cataloging economic evaluations currently exist, however they are restricted by the type of economic evaluations they include. There is a need for intervention-specific registries, that document all types of complete and partial economic evaluations and auxiliary information such as quality of life studies. The objective of this study is to describe the development of a pharmacoeconomic registry and provide best practices using an example of hormonal contraceptives.MethodsAn expert panel consisting of researchers with expertise in pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research was convened and the clinical focus of the registry was finalized after extensive discussion. A list of key continuous, categorical and descriptive variables was developed to capture all relevant data with each variable defined in a data dictionary. A web-based data collection tool was designed to capture and store the resulting metadata. A keyword based search strategy was developed to retrieve the published sources of literature. Finally, articles were screened for relevancy and data was extracted to populate the registry. Expert opinions were taken from the panel at each stage to arrive at consensus and ensure validity of the registry.ResultsThe registry focused on economic evaluation literature of hormonal contraceptives used for contraception. The registry consisted of 65 articles comprising of 22 cost-effectiveness analyses, 9 cost-utility analyses, 7 cost-benefit analyses, 1 cost-minimization, 14 cost analyses, 10 cost of illness studies and 2 quality of life studies. The best practices followed in the development of the registry were summarized as recommendations. The completed registry, data dictionary and associated data files can be accessed in the supplementary information files.ConclusionThis registry is a comprehensive database of economic evaluations, including costs, clinical probabilities and health-state utility estimates. The collated data captured from published information in this registry can be used to identify trends in the literature, conduct systematic reviews and meta-analysis and develop novel pharmacoeconomic models.

Cost-effectiveness in surgery: concepts of cost-utility analysis explained.

Economic evaluations are increasingly becoming part of the surgical evidence base. With health and research guidelines emphasizing both clinical and economic benefits, surgeons will need to consider the impact of economic evaluations in the future. It seems reasonable that surgical costs in the public healthcare sector should be justified by the benefits that clinical interventions offer. Thus, it is vital to understand the methodological differences, reported outcomes and limitations of economic evaluations pertinent to surgical practice as well. As terminology and concepts can be unfamiliar to surgeons, understanding results from these studies can seem difficult. This article aims to inform surgical readers of the processes involved in performing economic evaluations to determine and compare the cost-effectiveness of treatments. The various types of economic evaluations, their uses, design characteristics, model parameters, interpretation of outputs, uncertainty analyses and notable limitations are considered. Through a hypothetical clinical example that compares costs and effects of surgical versus medical treatment for cancer, key concepts in economic evaluations are considered.

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 …

Using information on ART costs and benefits to mobilise resources – comparing different methods and contexts

Sustaining HIV and AIDS responses depends on a mix of donor, government and private funders. Their decisions about investing in HIV treatment may be informed by various types of economic evaluations, which may be more or less useful for different contexts. This paper benchmarks methods against each other. Epidemiological and demographic impacts of HIV and antiretroviral therapy (ART) from 1996–2015 were quantified using country- specific spectrum files. The study compared societal benefits of ART using the full income (FI) methodology with “conventional” benefit, utility and effectiveness estimates produced with the same data. The FI estimates suggested $3.50 in benefits per dollar spent on ART globally, 2.6 times larger than productivity-related measures of benefits, of $1.33 in benefits per dollar. Higher benefit-cost ratios are mainly because FI reflects value of life beyond what people produce at work and in non-working age groups, and allocates the future stream of benefits in the year that death is avoided. ART costs were 0.78 times per capita GDP per quality-adjusted life-years gained globally. FI benefit-cost ratios are considerably higher in upper- and lower-middle-income countries than in low- or high-income countries. Productivity-based benefits also exceeded costs in all but one region but had smaller ratios and different regional patterns. Per capita GDP per quality-adjusted life-years ratios were below 1.2 for all regions and country income bands, suggesting cost effectiveness. The fact that FI returns of ART are higher than productivity returns, helps to quantify developmental benefits of interventions that directly extend life and its quality, arguably the objective of development. They provide an important argument to increase budget allocations to health sectors for ART scale-up, and not just reallocate existing health resources. Benchmarking FI returns against cost per quality- adjusted life-years may allow comparison to other “cost effective” health interventions. However, caution should be taken in extrapolations between measures, because they produce different rankings across country categories.

Developing core economic outcome sets for asthma studies: a protocol for a systematic review

IntroductionCore outcome sets are standardised lists of outcomes, which should be measured and reported in all clinical studies of a specific condition. This study aims to develop core outcome sets...

Fasting and diabetes: Optimising health outcomes for Ramadan observers: A literature review

In this chapter, we provide a basic introduction to the different forms of economic evaluation, including cost-minimization analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost–benefit analysis, and cost–utility analysis. In particular, we discuss the measurement of costs and outcomes in these types of economic evaluation and explain how the perspective of an evaluation affects these forms of analysis. We discuss the measurement of costs and patient outcomes and introduce the main measurement tools used by health economists. The chapter also introduces the concepts of incremental analysis, the cost-effectiveness plane, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Finally, we discuss how the results of economic evaluations can be used in decision-making.

Comparing faers and twitter data on high-risk medications for the elderly and the impact on the cms star rating system

In this chapter, we provide a basic introduction to the different forms of economic evaluation, including cost-minimization analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost–benefit analysis, and cost–utility analysis. In particular, we discuss the measurement of costs and outcomes in these types of economic evaluation and explain how the perspective of an evaluation affects these forms of analysis. We discuss the measurement of costs and patient outcomes and introduce the main measurement tools used by health economists. The chapter also introduces the concepts of incremental analysis, the cost-effectiveness plane, and cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Finally, we discuss how the results of economic evaluations can be used in decision-making.

Economic evaluation on breast cancer screening in mainland China: a systematic review

Objective: To gather available evidence related to the economic evaluation on breast cancer screening in mainland China and to provide reference for further research. Methods: A systematic review was conducted to identify articles in PubMed and three Chinese databases (CNKI, Wanfang and VIP) during 1995-2015. Data related to descriptive characteristics, rates on participation and detection for population-based studies, methods for model-based studies, types of economic evaluation and results, were extracted. A Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) was used to assess the reporting quality of included studies. Results: Of the 356 records searched in the databases, 13 studies (all published between 2012 and 2015) were included in the current paper involving 11 population-based studies and 3 model-based evaluations (1 study using both methods). Age of the participants who started to be engaged in the screening program ranged from 18 to 45 years old, but terminated at the age of 59 years or older. The screening modalities included single-used clinical breast examination, mammography and ultrasound or combined applications. Study persepectives were described in 7 studies, with 5 from the healthcare providers, and 2 from societal angles. Only 5 studies discounted cost or effectiveness. Out of 11 papers, 9 showed the results on cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) that reporting the cost per breast cancer detection, with median as 145.0 thousand Chinese Yuan (CNY), ranging from 49.7 thousand to 2 293.0 thousand CNY. From 4 papers with results of cost-utility analysis (CUA), the cost per quality adjusted life year (QALY) gained or cost per disability adjusted life year (DALY) averted, were evaluated. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was from 2.9 thousand to 270.7 thousand CNY (GDP per capita of China was CNY 49.3 thousand in 2015). In 13 studies, the quality of reporting varied, with an average score of 14.5 (range: 9.5-21.0). In the domains of study perspective, discounting, ICER and uncertainty, all the scores of equalities were relatively levels. Conclusions: Currently, evidence on economic evaluation of breast cancer screening in mainland China remained limited and weakly comparable, particularly model-based studies. Comprehensive analysis from societal perspective and QALY or DALY related cost-utility analysis should be implemented.

PCN239 - Which Types of Economic Evaluations are Considered by Health Technology Assessment Agencies?

PCN239 - Which Types of Economic Evaluations are Considered by Health Technology Assessment Agencies?

Welfarism and Extra Welfarism in Healthcare : Which is More Appropriate for Resource Allocation Decisions in Health?

As cost of health care is increasing around the world, resource allocation decisions need to be taken on the basis of explicit theoretical concepts. Health economics as an area of study specializes in guiding decision-makers to make correct decisions in allocating health care resources. Cost-benefit analysis and cost-utility analysis are two types of economic evaluation, which are used in taking decisions regarding healthcare. However, they are based on two different theoretical foundations, and so, it is imperative that the correct economic evaluation method is identified. While cost-benefit analysis (CBA) measures both costs and outcomes in monetary terms, cost-utility analysis measures outcomes in terms of a particular metric called quality adjusted life years (QALYs). CBA is based on the idea of welfare economics, while CUA is based on the idea of extra-welfarism. This paper described the theoretical foundation of both these methods and also highlighted the strengths and weaknesses of using both the methods. Finally, the paper concluded by arguing for the usage of extra-welfarist economic concepts in resource allocation decisions in health care.

Treatment Sequencing After Failure of the First Biologic in Cost-Effectiveness Models of Psoriasis: A Systematic Review of Published Models and Clinical Practice Guidelines

ObjectivesTo analyse the treatment sequencing assumptions after failure on a first-line biologic in cost-effectiveness models of treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis, and to compare them with the most recent treatment guidelines.MethodsA systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit and the Cochrane Library databases used free text and Medical Subject Headings terms including psoriasis, biologic therapies indicated for psoriasis, and all types of economic evaluations. Two researchers performed 2-level abstract screening for articles meeting pre-specified inclusion criteria. Assumptions about treatment pathways after first-line biologic failure in the cost-effectiveness models were analysed. A second systematic search was performed for psoriasis clinical practice guidelines. Sequence assumptions were compared with treatment guideline recommendations.ResultsOf 25 cost-effectiveness modelling studies identified, ten estimated the incremental cost per responder; time horizons varied (12 weeks–18 months) and treatment sequencing was not considered. In 15 studies where treatment sequencing was considered, with time horizons up to 10 years, five studies included only a switch to nonsystemic therapy or best supportive care after first-line biologic failure. Another five of the 15 treatment-pathway studies were available only as abstracts with no details of the sequence assumptions. In five of the 15 studies, first-line biologic failure was followed by second-line biologic monotherapy, one of the recommendations in current treatment guidelines. In only one of these five studies was the efficacy of the second-line biologic adjusted downwards, compared with first-line treatment. Only one of these studies considered dose titration with a first-line biologic and none combination therapy (biologic plus methotrexate or phototherapy) after first-line biologic failure, as recommended in some treatment guidelines.ConclusionsCost-effectiveness models of first-line biologics for moderate to severe plaque psoriasis either do not include subsequent treatment regimens or include only some of the regimens recommended in current treatment guidelines. Results may be sensitive to assumptions about treatment sequencing and the choice and efficacy of subsequent treatment regimens.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40273-014-0130-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Health economics: Theoretical considerations and scope for application in the Indian context

AimsTo familiarize physicians about role of health economics, applications and scope in the Indian context. MethodsReview of existing literature. ResultsHealth economics as a new discipline in India is described. The definition of economics and why economics is important to the physician is discussed in detail. The case of economics in clinical medicine and public health, economic evaluations, characteristics of health care market, market failure, and information asymmetry are discussed. The conceptual basis and types of economic evaluations are described along with an overview of health care financing and studies from the Indian context. ConclusionsAfter describing the challenges in practice of health economics the scope for health economics in India is described.

Health economic evaluation: Important principles and methodology

To discuss health economic evaluation and improve the understanding of common methodology. This article discusses the methodology for the following types of economic evaluations: cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, cost-benefit, and economic modeling. Topics include health-state utility measures, the quality-adjusted life year (QALY), uncertainty analysis, discounting, decision tree analysis, and Markov modeling. Economic evaluation is the comparative analysis of alternative courses of action in terms of both their costs and consequences. With increasing health care expenditure and limited resources, it is important for physicians to consider the economic impact of their interventions. Understanding common methodology involved in health economic evaluation will improve critical appraisal of the literature and optimize future economic evaluations.

Conducting economic evaluations of screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking: Methods and evidence to date for informing policy

Many policy review articles have concluded that alcohol screening and brief intervention (SBI) is both cost-effective and cost-beneficial. Yet a recent cost-effectiveness review for the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence suggests that these conclusions may be premature. This article offers a brief synopsis of the various types of economic analyses that may be applied to SBI, including cost analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis, cost-benefit analysis and other types of economic evaluation. A brief overview of methodological issues is provided, and examples from the SBI evaluation literature are provided. The current evidence base is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about the cost, cost-effectiveness or cost-benefit of SBI and about the impact of SBI on health-care utilisation.[Cowell AJ, Bray JW, Mills MJ, Hinde JM. Conducting economic evaluations of screening and brief intervention for hazardous drinking: Methods and evidence to date for informing policy.

Avaliação econômica em saúde: aplicações em doenças infecciosas

The rise in healthcare expenditures due to the incorporation of new diagnostic and therapeutic technologies and increasing life expectancy is a major concern, particularly in developing countries. The role of economic evaluation in health is to optimize the benefits of available resources. This article aims to allow readers to identify the basic characteristics and types of economic evaluation in health and understand its methods, with an emphasis on infectious diseases. We thus review the following concepts: study perspective, analytic scope, costs, and discount rate. We also focus on characteristics of cost-minimization, cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analyses, with examples. The article describes the most popular study designs for economic evaluation, discusses different models, and examines the importance of sensitivity analysis. Our final comments address the importance of adopting economic evaluations in health in Brazil.