Types Of Economic Evaluations Research Articles

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.

Approaches for Economic Evaluations of Health Care Technologies

Economic evaluations involve the comparison of alternative courses of action in terms of both their costs and their consequences. In response to increasing health care costs, economic evaluations of competing technologies, including radiologic interventions, are increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions. It is therefore crucial that radiologists have a thorough understanding of the methods. The objective of this paper is to present a detailed overview of the principles and methods of economic evaluations of health technologies, including recent methodologic developments. For the purpose of this paper, the key elements of an economic evaluation are divided into 5 broad sections: 1) types of economic evaluations (eg, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis), 2) study perspectives (ie, temporal and cost perspectives), 3) analysis of costs and effects (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, cost-effectiveness planes), 4) conducting economic evaluations alongside trials or using decision-analytic models, and 5) dealing with the different forms of uncertainty in economic evaluations (eg, sampling uncertainty in trials, parameter uncertainty in models). Examples from the recent radiology literature are used to explain the key concepts. This review improves upon the previous educational papers published in radiologic journals, as it covers recent methodologic advances regarding the treatment of uncertainty.

Una panoramica delle metodologie per la valutazione delle cure informali negli studi di economia sanitaria

This paper compares several applied valuation methods for including informal care in economic evaluations of healthcare programmes: the proxy good method; the opportunity cost method; the contingent valuation method (CVM); conjoint measurement (CM); and valuation of health effects in terms of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) and well-being. The comparison focuses on three questions: what outcome measures are available for including informal care in economic evaluations of healthcare programmes; whether these measures are compatible with the common types of economic evaluation; and, when applying these measures, whether all relevant aspects of informal care are incorporated.

Simplified Pharmacoeconomics of Critical Care and Severe Sepsis

Understanding pharmacoeconomic evaluation can empower clinicians to be stronger decision makers. However, cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) in critical care are sometimes not easy to understand and often not placed in context with other interventions. The purpose of this article is to clarify and simplify the CEA process using examples from critical care and severe sepsis. First discussed is cost-effectiveness as a framework for clinical decision making and how it compares to other types of economic evaluations. Then important considerations when conducting or reviewing CEAs are explored, such as perspective, discounting, sensitivity analysis, and grading of CEAs, as well as shortcomings and resistance to using CEAs. Next, applications of CEA in critical care and severe sepsis are reviewed. Included is the Food and Drug Administration-approved drug for severe sepsis, drotrecogin alfa (activated), as an example of a recently new critical care intervention that resulted in significant interest in understanding cost-effectiveness. Finally, CEAs of other medical and nonmedical interventions are placed in context with CEAs from critical care. Understanding pharmacoeconomic evaluation can empower clinicians to be stronger decision makers. CEAs provide decision makers a quantitative measure of the value of therapeutic options that can guide clinicians toward balancing the cost burdens of therapy with their profound effects and choosing between options that compete for funding.

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.

A Primer on Economic Evaluations Related to Expansion of Newborn Screening for Genetic and Metabolic Disorders

Newborns in every state are screened for genetic/metabolic disorders, but there is no uniform national screening program. Recently, a federal panel concluded that the number of disorders screened should be increased from 9 to Twenty-nine. In order for state leaders, and for the clinicians who inform them, to make sound decisions about expanding newborn screening programs, they need to be aware of the costs and outcomes of the entire screening program. This paper examines newborn screening from several perspectives: status of state programs, screening technology, and financing. In addition, various types of economic evaluations are defined, and a number of economic studies are explored.

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...

Economic Evaluations in Pain Management

This paper describes how investigators may design, conduct, and report economic evaluations of pharmacotherapy for pain and symptom management. Because economic evaluation of therapeutic interventions is becoming increasingly important, there is a need for guidance on how economic evaluations can be optimally conducted. The steps required to conduct an economic evaluation are described to provide this guidance. Economic evaluations require two or more therapeutic interventions to be compared in relation to costs and effects. There are five types of economic evaluations, based on analysis of: (1) cost-effectiveness, (2) cost-utility, (3) cost-minimization, (4) cost-consequence, and (5) cost-benefit analyses. The six required steps are: identify the perspective of the study; identify the alternatives that will be compared; identify the relevant costs and effects; determine how to collect the cost and effect data; determine how to perform calculation for cost and effects data; and determine the manner in which to depict the results and draw comparisons.

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.

Economic Evaluations in Pain Management

This paper describes how investigators may design, conduct, and report economic evaluations of pharmacotherapy for pain and symptom management. Because economic evaluation of therapeutic interventions is becoming increasingly important, there is a need for guidance on how economic evaluations can be optimally conducted. The steps required to conduct an economic evaluation are described to provide this guidance. Economic evaluations require two or more therapeutic interventions to be compared in relation to costs and effects. There are five types of economic evaluations, based on analysis of: (1) cost-effectiveness, (2) cost-utility, (3) cost-minimization, (4) cost-consequence, and (5) cost-benefit analyses. The six required steps are: identify the perspective of the study; identify the alternatives that will be compared; identify the relevant costs and effects; determine how to collect the cost and effect data; determine how to perform calculation for cost and effects data; and determine the manner in which to depict the results and draw comparisons.

Economic Evaluation for Ophthalmologists

Purpose: This review will describe the basic concepts of economic evaluation, using examples from the ophthalmic literature. The aim is to provide readers with knowledge about the fundamentals of economic evaluation to enable them to read papers critically, make healthcare funding and planning decisions, and understand the economic evaluation of interventions. Review: Ophthalmic services are often constrained by a lack of funding, and this is true in both high- and low-income countries. Ophthalmology also competes with other healthcare specialities for funding. Economic evaluation is used to identify the most efficient way of allocating and planning the use of these scarce resources among alternative activities. An economic evaluation is typically conducted by comparing two or more interventions in terms of their effectiveness and their cost. Cost is the value of all resources used in the intervention. Effects, or consequences of the intervention, can be measured in monetary terms, through disease-specific outcomes or using health-related quality of life measures. The four most commonly used types of economic evaluations are cost-minimization analysis, cost-benefit analysis, cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis. There are a variety of intended and unintended consequences of a health intervention, and so the consequences of the intervention may be positive or negative. Economic models, such as decision trees and Markov models, calculate effectiveness and costs, taking into account all the consequences of the intervention, including complications. Uncertainties in the parameters of the models can be expressed through sensitivity analyses and confidence intervals. Conclusions: Economic evaluation may be used to identify the most efficient way of allocating scarce resources among alternative activities. Its use, if standardized in all areas, can improve the quality of care while enhancing efficiency and thereby enabling more programs to be funded.

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 evaluations and randomized trials in spinal disorders: principles and methods.

Descriptive methodologic recommendations. To help researchers designing, conducting, and reporting economic evaluations in the field of back and neck pain. Economic evaluations of both existing and new therapeutic interventions are becoming increasingly important. There is a need to improve the methods of economic evaluations in the field of spinal disorders. To improve the methods of economic evaluations in the field of spinal disorders, this article describes the various steps in an economic evaluation, using as example a study on the cost-effectiveness of manual therapy, physiotherapy, and usual care provided by the general practitioner for patients with neck pain. An economic evaluation is a study in which two or more interventions are systematically compared with regard to both costs and effects. There are four types of economic evaluations, based on analysis of: (1) cost-effectiveness, (2) cost-utility, (3) cost-minimization, and (4) cost-benefit. The cost-utility analysis is a special case of cost-effectiveness analysis. The first step in all these economic evaluations is to identify the perspective of the study. The choice of the perspective will have consequences for the identification of costs and effects. Secondly, the alternatives that will be compared should be identified. Thirdly, the relevant costs and effects should be identified. Economic evaluations are usually performed from a societal perspective and include consequently direct health care costs, direct nonhealth care costs, and indirect costs. Fourthly, effect data are collected by means of questionnaires or interviews, and relevant cost data with regard to effect measures and health care utilization, work absenteeism, travel expenses, use of over-the-counter medication, and help from family and friends, are collected by means of cost diaries, questionnaires, or (telephone) interviews. Fifthly, real costs are calculated, or the costs are estimated on the basis of real costs, guideline prices, or tariffs. Finally, in the statistical analysis the mean direct, indirect, and total costs of the alternatives are compared, using bootstrapping techniques. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are graphically presented on a cost-effectiveness plane and acceptability curves are calculated. Economic evaluations require specific methods. These recommendations may be helpful in improving the quality of economic evaluations of new and existing therapeutic interventions in the field of spinal disorders.

Discussion paper - Why Physiotherapy Needs Economics

Issues relating to limited healthcare resources are relevant to all health professionals. Allocation of such resources is increasingly linked to evidence based practice. Thus, involvement in decision-making by health professionals will allow for accurate and meaningful interpretation of clinical results and evidence. Inherent in resource allocation are issues of economic origin. An understanding of the basics of economic evaluation and costing will enhance health professionals' participation in service development and funding procurement. The types of economic evaluation utilised in health care are cost minimisation analysis, cost effectiveness analysis, cost utility analysis and cost benefit analysis. Each type of evaluation measures the costs and consequences of health care programmes in a unique way.

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.

Introduction to health economics:terminology and concepts — types of economic evaluations. Choice perspective. Cost components. Markov models

Introduction to health economics:terminology and concepts — types of economic evaluations. Choice perspective. Cost components. Markov models

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.

Types of economic evaluation

This is the fourth in a series of occasional notes on economics The pursuit of efficiency in the healthcare sector requires priority to be given to those treatments which provide the greatest benefit per unit of cost. Alternative interventions often have to be compared to determine whether a change in the mix of interventions would increase efficiency. Although economic evaluations approach costs in a common format, they differ in the way they approach benefits. These differences play a critical role in developing criteria for efficiency.1 Cost benefit analysis involves measuring costs and benefits in commensurate terms, usually monetary. Welfare economics shows that under certain conditions any net excess of monetary benefits over costs represents the gain in welfare by society.1 Cost benefit analysis makes it possible to determine, firstly, whether an individual intervention offers an overall net welfare gain and, secondly, how …

Recent advances in the methods of cost-benefit analysis in healthcare. Matching the art to the science.

This paper outlines recent advances in the methods of cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Economic evaluations in healthcare can be criticised for, amongst other things, the inappropriate use of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios and the reporting of benefits in terms of cost savings, such as treatment costs averted. Many such economic evaluations are, according to the 'scientific' definition, CBAs. The 'balance-sheet' (or opportunity cost) approach is a form of CBA which can be used to identify who bears the costs and who reaps the benefits from any change. Whilst the next stage in a CBA, as defined in health economics, would require that all costs and benefits be valued in monetary terms, the balance-sheet approach, however, advocates that available monetary values can be augmented by other measures of cost and benefit. As such, this approach, which has a theoretical basis, is proposed as a practical prescription for CBA and highlights the notion that unquantified benefits are important and can be included within CBAs even when monetarisation is not possible. Recent methodological developments in monetary valuation for use in CBA are the development of the technique of willingness to pay, the use of conjoint analysis (CA) to elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) values and advances in the debate on the inclusion of production gains in CBAs. Whilst acknowledging that there have been developments in each of these areas, it is claimed there has also been progress in using CBA as a framework for evaluation, as reflected by the balance-sheet approach. The paper concludes by stating that almost all types of economic evaluation have an element of the 'cost-benefit' approach in them. The important issue is to focus on the policy question to be addressed and to outline the relevant costs and benefits in a manner which assists the evaluation of welfare changes resulting from changes in healthcare delivery. The focus should not be on moulding a question to fit a hybrid definition of an analytical technique.