Use of Checklists in Reviews of Health Economic Evaluations, 2010 to 2018

A systematic review of economic evaluations conducted on gender-transformative interventions aimed at preventing unintended pregnancy and promoting sexual health in adolescents

AIMS

We synthesised the best-available evidence on economic evaluations of gender-transformative interventions that prevent unintended pregnancy and promote sexual-health in adolescents. We also assessed the methodological quality of the economic-evaluation studies and identified gaps in the economic-evaluation evidence.

DESIGN

A systematic review (SR) of economic evaluations reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 2020.

DATA SOURCES

We searched the following bibliographic databases for economic evaluations that met our selection criteria; PubMed, Cochrane, National Health Service EE database, SCOPUS, CINHAL, Web of Science and Paediatric EE Database. We also conducted a grey literature search. We included articles published from January 1, 1990 to December 31, 2021, in English, including adolescents aged 10-19. Two independent reviewers conducted the title and full-text screening.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

One reviewer conducted data extraction and quality assessment, which a second reviewer checked. We used the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement and Consensus on Health Economic Criteria (CHEC) checklist to measure the reporting and methodological quality. Synthesis was done narratively and using summary tables.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were included, with 16 full and six partial economic evaluations. The quality of studies was moderate to high for most. The most reported outcomes were incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, costs per averted sexually transmitted infection, quality-adjusted life years saved per averted infection and costs per averted pregnancy. Most studies were cost-effective or cost-saving.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the economic evaluations are cost-effective. There is a scarcity of available economic evaluations for most existing gender-transformative interventions, with most included studies originating from high-income countries (HICs). There is a need to develop guidance specific to economic evaluations of gender-transformative interventions.

Advances in Addressing Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluation: A Review of the Methods Literature

Cost-effectiveness analyses commonly use population or sample averages, which can mask key differences across subgroups and may lead to suboptimal resource allocation. Despite there being several new methods developed over the last decade, there is no recent summary of what methods are available to researchers. This review sought to identify advances in methods for addressing patient heterogeneity in economic evaluations and to provide an overview of these methods. A literature search was conducted using the Econlit, Embase and MEDLINE databases to identify studies published after 2011 (date of a previous review on this topic). Eligible studies needed to have an explicit methodological focus, related to how patient heterogeneity can be accounted for within a full economic evaluation. Sixteen studies were included in the review. Methodologies were varied and included regression techniques, model design and value of information analysis. Recent publications have applied methodologies more commonly used in other fields, such as machine learning and causal forests. Commonly noted challenges associated with considering patient heterogeneity included data availability (e.g., sample size), statistical issues (e.g., risk of false positives) and practical factors (e.g., computation time). A range of methods are available to address patient heterogeneity in economic evaluation, with relevant methods differing according to research question, scope of the economic evaluation and data availability. Researchers need to be aware of the challenges associated with addressing patient heterogeneity (e.g., data availability) to ensure findings are meaningful and robust. Future research is needed to assess whether and how methods are being applied in practice.

Model-Based Economic Evaluations of Interventions for Dementia: An Updated Systematic Review and Quality Assessment

BACKGROUND

There has been an increase in model-based economic evaluations of interventions for dementia. The most recent systematic review of economic evaluations for dementia highlighted weaknesses in studies, including lack of justification for model assumptions and data inputs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to update the last published systematic review of model-based economic evaluations of interventions for dementia, including Alzheimer's disease, with a focus on any methodological improvements and quality assessment of the studies.

METHODS

Systematic searches in eight databases, including PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit, international HTA database, and the Tufts Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry were undertaken from February 2018 until August 2022. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the Philips checklist and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist. The findings were summarized through narrative analysis.

RESULTS

This review included 23 studies, comprising cost-utility analyses (87%), cost-benefit analyses (9%) and cost-effectiveness analyses (4%). The studies covered various interventions, including pharmacological (n = 10, 43%), non-pharmacological (n = 4, 17%), prevention (n = 4, 17%), diagnostic (n = 4, 17%) and integrated (n = 1, 4%) [diagnostics-pharmacologic] strategies. Markov transition models were commonly employed (65%), followed by decision trees (13%) and discrete-event simulation (9%). Several interventions from all categories were reported as being cost effective. The quality of reporting was suboptimal for the Methods and Results sections in almost all studies, although the majority of studies adequately addressed the decision problem, scope, and model-type selection in their economic evaluations. Regarding the quality of methodology, only a minority of studies addressed competing theories or clearly explained the rationale for model structure. Furthermore, few studies systematically identified key parameters or assessed data quality, and uncertainty was mostly addressed partially.

CONCLUSIONS

This review informs future research and resource allocation by providing insights into model-based economic evaluations for dementia interventions and highlighting areas for improvement.

Economic evaluations of medical devices in paediatrics: a systematic review and a quality appraisal of the literature

BACKGROUND

Although economic evaluations (EEs) have been increasingly applied to medical devices, little discussion has been conducted on how the different health realities of specific populations may impact the application of methods and the ensuing results. This is particularly relevant for pediatric populations, as most EEs on devices are conducted in adults, with specific aspects related to the uniqueness of child health often being overlooked. This study provides a review of the published EEs on devices used in paediatrics, assessing the quality of reporting, and summarising methodological challenges.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify peer-reviewed publications on the economic value of devices used in paediatrics in the form of full EEs (comparing both costs and consequences of two or more devices). After the removal of duplicates, article titles and abstracts were screened. The remaining full-text articles were retrieved and assessed for inclusion. In-vitro diagnostic devices were not considered in this review. Study descriptive and methodological characteristics were extracted using a structured template. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022 checklist was used to assess the quality of reporting. A narrative synthesis of the results was conducted followed by a critical discussion on the main challenges found in the literature.

RESULTS

39 full EEs were eligible for review. Most studies were conducted in high-income countries (67%) and focused on high-risk therapeutic devices (72%). Studies comprised 25 cost-utility analyses, 13 cost-effectiveness analyses and 1 cost-benefit analysis. Most of the studies considered a lifetime horizon (41%) and a health system perspective (36%). Compliance with the CHEERS 2022 items varied among the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the scant body of evidence on EEs focusing on devices in paediatrics results highlight the need to improve the quality of reporting and advance methods that can explicitly incorporate the multiple impacts related to the use of devices with distinct characteristics, as well as consider specific child health realities. The design of innovative participatory approaches and instruments for measuring outcomes meaningful to children and their families should be sought in future research.

A Systematic Review of Methods Used by Pediatric Cost-Utility Analyses to Include Family Spillover Effects

BACKGROUND

A child's health condition affects family members' health and well-being. However, pediatric cost-utility analysis (CUA) commonly ignores these family spillover effects leading to an incomplete understanding of the cost and benefits of a child's health intervention. Methodological challenges exist in assessing, valuing, and incorporating family spillover effects.

OBJECTIVE

This study systematically reviews and compare methods used to include family spillover effects in pediatric CUAs.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, EconLit, Cochrane collection, CINAHL, INAHTA, and the Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE) database from inception to 2020 to identify pediatric CUAs that included family spillover effects. The search was updated to 2021 using PEDE. The data describing in which family members spillover effects were measured, and how family spillover effects were measured, incorporated, and reported, were extracted. Common approaches were grouped conceptually. Further, this review identified theories or theoretical frameworks used to justify approaches for integrating family spillover effects into CUA.

RESULTS

Of 878 pediatric CUAs identified, 35 included family spillover effects. Most pediatric CUAs considered family spillover effects on one family member. Pediatric CUAs reported eight different approaches to measure the family spillover effects. The most common method was measuring the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) loss of the caregiver(s) or parent(s) due to a child's illness or disability using an isolated approach whereby family spillover effects were quantified in individual family members separately from other health effects. Studies used four approaches to integrate family spillover effects into CUA. The most common method was to sum children's and parents/caregivers' QALYs. Only two studies used a theoretical framework for incorporation of family spillover effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Few pediatric CUAs included family spillover effects and the observed variation indicated no consensus among researchers on how family spillover effects should be measured and incorporated. This heterogeneity is mirrored by a lack of practical guidelines by Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies or a theoretical foundation for including family spillover effects in pediatric CUA. The results from this review may encourage researchers to develop a theoretical framework and HTA agencies to develop guidelines for including family spillover effects. Such guidance may lead to more rigorous and standardized methods for including family spillover effects and better-quality evidence to inform decision-makers on the cost-effectiveness of pediatric health interventions.

The Checklist for Standard Methodological Requirements and Reporting of Economic Evaluation of Medicines in Slovakia

OBJECTIVES

We have developed a scientifically well-grounded, methodological, and reporting checklist for economic evaluation (EE) of medicines in the Slovak health technology assessment process, which serves as a supplement to the Slovak pharmacoeconomic guidelines.

METHODS

The checklist was developed using an iterative process in which items were generated and gradually added to the baseline checklist based on shortcomings identified in an analysis of Slovak EEs, using relevant published checklists, and Slovak, as well as international, methodological guidance that was identified in the systematic literature review. The selection of checklist recommendations, their clarity, and relevance to the Slovak setting were validated in the online survey.

RESULTS

From the sample of 151 price and reimbursement submissions published between January 2018 and July 2021, almost half of them (n = 73) received at least 1 request from the Ministry of Healthcare to justify or modify the methodology used in the EE; and in 18 proceedings, a negative opinion was issued because of shortcomings identified in the EE. The 25-items preliminary checklist, resulting from an iterative working process, has been validated in an online survey conducted among members of ISPOR Chapter Slovakia. After incorporating relevant comments, the final proposal for the Slovak checklist consists of 55 recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

The research represented the first attempt to create a Slovak EE checklist, which serves as a part of ISPOR Slovakia pharmacoeconomic guidelines. Implementation of the checklist allows checking whether EE meets legislative and methodological requirements and thus helps in improving the appropriateness and standardization of EEs in Slovakia.

Basics of health economics for clinical trials in orthopaedic trauma

With the rise in global healthcare spending, medical decision-making is increasingly based on health economics outcomes. This narrative review aims to provide an overview of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA), including their advantages and limitations, and outline practical aspects for implementing health economics in clinical trials for orthopaedic trauma. Both CEA and CUA offer several advantages. Firstly, they consider the costs as well as benefits of an intervention, providing a more comprehensive picture of its economic impact. Secondly, they provide a clear and straightforward metric for comparing interventions, which can help decision-makers make informed choices. However, there are methodological shortcomings that must be acknowledged, such as the lack of standardized instruments for assessing health utility measures, which can result in a wide range of cost-benefit ratios. In addition, a consensus on the willingness-to-pay threshold still needs to be reached to develop decision rules for cost-effectiveness similar to clinical effectiveness. Methods such as CEA and CUA should be incorporated into clinical trials in orthopaedic trauma research. Practical aspects for this include planning in advance, preferably in cooperation with a health economist. Selecting appropriate outcome measures is crucial, and both the medical effects of interventions and quality of life instruments should be carefully chosen to ensure comparability with previous studies. Additionally, the potential impact on clinical practice and healthcare policies should be considered. Direct as well as indirect costs should be assessed, and quality assurance with well-established checklists should be confirmed.

A systematic review of economic evidence for community-based obesity prevention interventions in children

Multicomponent community-based obesity prevention interventions that engage multiple sectors have shown promise in preventing obesity in childhood; however, economic evaluations of such interventions are limited. This systematic review explores the methods used and summarizes current evidence of costs and cost-effectiveness of complex obesity prevention interventions. A systematic search was conducted using 12 academic databases and grey literature from 2006 to April 2022. Studies were included if they reported methods of costing and/or economic evaluation of multicomponent, multisectoral, and community-wide obesity prevention interventions. Results were reported narratively based on the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. Seventeen studies were included, reporting costing or economic evaluation of 13 different interventions. Five interventions reported full economic evaluations, five interventions reported economic evaluation protocols, two interventions reported cost analysis, and one intervention reported a costing protocol. Five studies conducted cost-utility analysis, three of which were cost-effective. One study reported a cost-saving return-on-investment ratio. The economic evidence for complex obesity prevention interventions is limited and therefore inconclusive. Challenges include accurate tracking of costs for interventions with multiple actors, and the limited incorporation of broader benefits into economic evaluation. Further methodological development is needed to find appropriate pragmatic methods to evaluate complex obesity prevention interventions.

Accounting for Adverse Events Following Immunization in Economic Evaluation: Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Pediatric Vaccines Against Pneumococcus, Rotavirus, Human Papillomavirus, Meningococcus and Measles-Mumps-Rubella-Varicella

OBJECTIVES

Economic evaluations of vaccines should accurately represent all relevant economic and health consequences of vaccination, including losses due to adverse events following immunization (AEFI). We investigated to what extent economic evaluations of pediatric vaccines account for AEFI, which methods are used to do so and whether inclusion of AEFI is associated with study characteristics and the vaccine's safety profile.

METHODS

A systematic literature search (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Systematic Reviews and Trials, Database of the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination of the University of York, EconPapers, Paediatric Economic Database Evaluation, Tufts New England Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, Tufts New England Global Health CEA, International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment Database) was performed for economic evaluations published between 2014 and 29 April 2021 (date of search) pertaining to the five groups of pediatric vaccines licensed in Europe and the United States since 1998: the human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccines, the meningococcal vaccines (MCV), the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) combination vaccines, the pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCV) and the rotavirus vaccines (RV). Rates of accounting for AEFI were calculated, stratified by study characteristics (e.g., region, publication year, journal impact factor, level of industry involvement) and triangulated with the vaccine's safety profile (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices [ACIP] recommendations and information on safety-related product label changes). The studies accounting for AEFI were analyzed in terms of the methods used to account for both cost and effect implications of AEFI.

RESULTS

We identified 112 economic evaluations, of which 28 (25%) accounted for AEFI. This proportion was significantly higher for MMRV (80%, four out of five evaluations), MCV (61%, 11 out of 18 evaluations) and RV (60%, nine out of 15 evaluations) compared to HPV (6%, three out of 53 evaluations) and PCV (5%, one out of 21 evaluations). No other study characteristics were associated with a study's likelihood of accounting for AEFI. Vaccines for which AEFI were more frequently accounted for also had a higher frequency of label changes and a higher level of attention to AEFI in ACIP recommendations. Nine studies accounted for both the cost and health implications of AEFI, 18 studies considered only costs and one only health outcomes. While the cost impact was usually estimated based on routine billing data, the adverse health impact of AEFI was usually estimated based on assumptions.

DISCUSSION

Although (mild) AEFI were demonstrated for all five studied vaccines, only a quarter of reviewed studies accounted for these, mostly in an incomplete and inaccurate manner. We provide guidance on which methods to use to better quantify the impact of AEFI on both costs and health outcomes. Policymakers should be aware that the impact of AEFI on cost-effectiveness is likely to be underestimated in the majority of economic evaluations.

The economic evaluation of ALS care: quality and cost

Objective: The study aims to analyze the quality of studies that make economic evaluations for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). Assessing the quality of studies can guide policy-making and planning. Methods: One of the most recognized checklists "The Consensus on Health Economic Criteria" (CHEC)-list designed by Evers et al. in 2005 aims to answer two important questions: is the methodology of the study appropriate, and are the results of the study valid? We reviewed studies focusing on ALS and its economic costs, and evaluated the studies with (CHEC)-list. Results: We examined 25 articles in terms of their cost evaluation and quality. It is seen that they mainly focus on medical costs, ignoring social care costs. When the quality of the studies is examined, it is seen that the studies overall achieve high scores in terms of their purpose and research question, but some of the studies score low in terms of ethical dimension, comprehensiveness of expenditure items, their application of sensitivity analyses and their study design. Conclusions: The main recommendation of our study for future cost evaluation studies is that they should focus on the questions in the checklist that are scored low overall by the 25 articles, and consider the social care costs as well as medical costs. Our recommendations when designing cost studies can be applied to other chronic diseases with long-term economic costs like ALS.

Cost-effectiveness of Internet Interventions Compared With Treatment as Usual for People With Mental Disorders: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The economic costs of mental disorders for society are huge. Internet-based interventions are often coined as cost-effective alternatives to usual care, but the evidence is mixed.

OBJECTIVE

The aim was to review the literature on the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with usual care and to provide an estimate of the monetary benefits of such interventions compared with usual care.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was conducted, which included participants with symptoms of mental disorders; investigated a telephone- or internet-based intervention; included a control condition in the form of treatment as usual, psychological placebo, waiting list control, or bibliotherapy; reported outcomes on both quality of life and costs; and included articles published in English. Electronic databases such as PubMed (including MEDLINE), Embase, Emcare, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were used. Data on risk of bias, quality of the economic evaluation, quality-adjusted life years, and costs were extracted from the included studies, and the incremental net benefit was calculated and pooled.

RESULTS

The search yielded 6226 abstracts, and 37 studies with 14,946 participants were included. The quality of economic evaluations of the included studies was rated as moderate, and the risk of bias was high. A random-effects approach was maintained. Analyses suggested internet interventions were slightly more effective than usual care in terms of quality-adjusted life years gain (Hedges g=0.052, 95% CI 0.010-0.094; P=.02) and equally expensive (Hedges g=0.002, 95% CI -0.080 to 0.84; P=.96). The pooled incremental net benefit was US $255 (95% CI US $91 to US $419; P=.002), favoring internet interventions over usual care. The perspective of the economic evaluation and targeted mental disorder moderated the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate that the cost-effectiveness of internet interventions for mental disorders compared with a care-as-usual approach is likely, but generalizability to new studies is poor given the substantial heterogeneity. This is the first study in the field of mental health to pool cost-effectiveness outcomes in an aggregate data meta-analysis.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019141659; https://tinyurl.com/3cu99b34.

Costs associated with retinopathy of prematurity: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To review and analyse evidence regarding costs for retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) screening, lifetime costs and resource use among infants born preterm who develop ROP, and how these costs have developed over time in different regions.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis DATA SOURCES: PubMed and Scopus from inception to 23 June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Included studies presented costs for ROP screening and the lifetime costs (including laser treatment and follow-up costs) and resource use among people who develop ROP. Studies not reporting on cost calculation methods or ROP-specific costs were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers screened for inclusion and extracted data, including items from a published checklist for quality assessment used for bias assessment, summary and random-effects meta-analysis for treatment costs. Included studies were further searched to identify eligible references and citations.

RESULTS

In total, 15 studies reported ROP screening costs, and 13 reported lifetime costs (either treatment and/or follow-up costs) for infants with ROP. The range for screening costs (10 studies) was US$5-US$253 per visit, or US$324-US$1072 per screened child (5 studies). Costs for treatment (11 studies) ranged from US$38 to US$6500 per child. Four studies reported healthcare follow-up costs (lifetime costs ranging from US$64 to US$2420, and 10-year costs of US$1695, respectively), and of these, three also reported lifetime costs for blindness (range US$26 686-US$224 295) using secondary cost data. Included papers largely followed the quality assessment checklist items, thus indicating a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

The costs of screening for and treating ROP are small compared with the societal costs of resulting blindness. However, little evidence is available for predicting the effects of changes in patient population, screening schedule or ROP treatments.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42020208213.

Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of Health Economic Evaluation Studies (2007-2019) Conducted in South Korea

BACKGROUND

South Korea formally adopted economic evaluation in December 2006 to aid drug reimbursement decision-making. While this policy change is applied only to pharmaceuticals, it has also sparked interest in economic evaluations for non-pharmaceutical interventions and programmes.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to provide a snapshot of the current practice for published health economic evaluation studies and critically assess the quality of these studies.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed on multiple databases (EMBASE, PubMed, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, Scopus, Korean Medical database, Korean studies Information Service System, and Research Information Sharing Service) to identify health economic evaluation studies published between January 2007 and December 2019. The inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed, original health economic evaluations (cost-utility, cost-effectiveness, cost-minimisation, and cost-benefit analyses) published in English or Korean. Two reviewers selected studies for inclusion and extracted data from the included studies. Key characteristics of these studies were descriptively summarised, and study quality was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument on a 100-point scale.

RESULTS

A total of 162 studies were included in this review (63 for drugs, 51 for non-pharmaceutical treatments/health technologies, and 48 for health programmes). These numbers confirm a significant increase in the number of publications since the policy introduction. However, the quality of these studies remained relatively low, with a mean QHES score of 57.9 (± 16.0). Study quality also varied substantially, with the QHES scores ranging from 15 to 87. The scores were notably lower in studies with non-pharmaceutical interventions and programmes, cost-effectiveness analyses or cost-benefit analyses, retrospective study-based or simple modelling-based analyses, and those locally published. In addition, a considerable proportion of these studies did not state or specify essential components of economic evaluation, such as perspectives (30.2%), time horizons (29.6%), discount rates (34.6%), and sensitivity analyses (24.7%). While the use of local data either fully or partially was relatively higher for unit costs (94.4%) and resource utilisation (90.1%), it was lower for utility weights (47.1%), treatment effects (63.0%), and baseline risks (70.4%). Transferability or generalisability issues were infrequently discussed when relying on foreign sources. In addition, the included studies were often not well structured, making it difficult to assess their quality.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that there is still much room for improving the quality of health economic evaluation studies conducted in South Korea. Policymakers should critically evaluate available cost-effectiveness evidence, especially for non-pharmaceutical interventions and programmes, when using it for decision-making in South Korea.

Comparative Cost-effectiveness of Trabeculectomy versus MicroShunt in the US Medicare System

PURPOSE

To assess the societal cost-utility of the MicroShunt compared with trabeculectomy for the surgical management of glaucoma in the US Medicare system.

DESIGN

Cost-utility analysis using efficacy and safety results of a randomized controlled trial and other pivotal clinical trials.

PARTICIPANTS

Markov model cohort of patients with open-angle glaucoma.

METHODS

Open-angle glaucoma treatment costs and effects were analyzed with a deterministic model over a 1-year horizon using TreeAge software. Health states included the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson glaucoma stages (mild, moderate, advanced, blind) and death. Both treatment arms received additional ocular hypotensive agents to control intraocular pressure (IOP). Treatment effect was measured as mean number of ocular hypotensive medications and reduction in IOP, which had a direct impact on transition probabilities between health states. Analyses of scenarios were performed with longer time horizons. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to assess the impact of alternative model inputs. Both treatment arms were subject to reported complication rates, which were factored in the model.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained.

RESULTS

At 1 year, the MicroShunt had an expected cost of US dollars (USD) 6318 compared with USD 4260 for trabeculectomy. MicroShunt patients gained 0.85 QALYs compared with 0.86 QALYs for trabeculectomy, resulting in a dominated incremental cost-utility ratio of USD 187 680. Dominance is a health economic term used to describe a treatment option that is both more costly and less effective than the alternative. The MicroShunt remained dominant in 1-way sensitivity analyses using best-case input parameters (including a device fee of USD 0). At a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 50 000, the likelihood of the MicroShunt being cost-effective was 6.4%. Dominance continued in longer time horizons, up to 20 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Trabeculectomy appears to be a dominant treatment strategy over the MicroShunt in the surgical management of glaucoma. More independent, long-term studies are required for the MicroShunt and other subconjunctival microstent devices to evaluate their use in clinical practice.

A Comparison of the Content and Consistency of Methodological Quality and Transferability Checklists for Reviewing Model-Based Economic Evaluations

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to examine whether and how the content of six checklists (Caro, Consensus on Health Economic Criteria [CHEC]-Extended, European Network of Health Economic Databases [EURONHEED], National Institute for Health and Care Excellence [NICE], Philips, Welte) affect the consistency in findings on methodological quality and transferability, using 10 model-based economic evaluations of genetic-guided pharmacotherapy for venous thromboembolism.

METHODS

Each checklist was categorised by domain (structure, data, consistency, etc.) and type of assessment (presence vs. appropriateness) and was applied to each study by two independent reviewers who agreed on ratings via consensus, and discussion with a third reviewer when necessary. Methodological quality scores and rankings were examined using Spearman correlation tests, with subgroup analyses for domains and types of assessment. We compared overall ratings of transferability qualitatively, including how content may affect what is considered 'transferable'.

RESULTS

The checklists had similar proportions of items judging presence and appropriateness, but varying proportions of items across domains. For methodological quality, ranking consistencies were the highest between CHEC-Extended-Philips, Philips-NICE and NICE-Caro, with similar consistencies for domains and type of assessment. For transferability, NICE and Caro identified the same study, which scored high on EURONHEED, as transferable to the UK, while Welte, which considered methodological quality, identified none as transferable.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that the choice of checklist can affect findings on study quality and decisions about whether study results are transferable, indicating that different checklists may shortlist different sets of studies in formulating policy recommendations, leading to different policy decisions. Our systematic approach for evaluating the content of methodological quality and transferability checklists of economic evaluations can be extended to other checklists.

Economic Evaluation of Health Behavior Interventions to Prevent and Manage Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Asia: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Health behavior interventions implemented in Asian countries often lack economic evaluations that effectively address the problems of type 2 diabetes mellitus. This review systematically assessed the existing literature on economic evaluation of health behavior interventions to prevent and manage type 2 diabetes mellitus for people living in Asian countries. Eligible studies were identified through a search of six bibliographic databases, namely, PubMed, Scopus, Public Health Database by ProQuest, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature Complete, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Randomized controlled trials of health behavior interventions and studies published in the English language from January 2000 to May 2022 were included in the review. The search yielded 3867 records, of which 11 studies were included in the review. All included studies concluded that health behavior interventions were cost-effective. Eight of these studies undertook an evaluation from a health system perspective, two studies used both societal and health system perspectives, and one study utilized a societal and multi-payer perspective. This review identified the time horizon, direct and indirect medical costs, and discount rates as the most important considerations in determining cost effectiveness. These findings have implications in extending health behavior interventions to prevent and manage type 2 diabetes mellitus in low-resource settings, and are likely to yield the most promising outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

A Systematic Literature Review of Economic Evaluations and Cost Studies of the Treatment of Psoriasis, Atopic Dermatitis, and Chronic Urticaria

Introduction

Psoriasis (PSO), atopic dermatitis (AD), and chronic urticaria (CU) are common manifestations of immunological skin and subcutaneous conditions and have been shown to have a substantial impact on the quality of life of patients. The cost of treating those conditions can also be high, as the use of biologic treatments has become more common for moderate to severe patients. In this review, we examine characteristics of economic evaluations and cost studies conducted for the three conditions.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from January 1, 2016 to October 26, 2020 to identify economic evaluations where the cost of one or more drug treatment was evaluated and cost studies covering any intervention type. Each database was searched using keyword and MeSH terms related to treatment costs (e.g., health care cost, drug cost, etc.) and each condition (e.g., PSO, AD, eczema, CU, etc.).

Results

A total of 123 studies were reviewed, including 104 studies (85%) of PSO (including psoriasis, plaque psoriasis, psoriatic arthritis, and psoriasis vulgaris), 14 studies (11%) of AD, and 5 studies (4%) of CU. Seventy-two studies (59%) reviewed reported the inclusion of biologic treatments, 10 studies (8%) did not include biologic treatments, and 41 studies (33%) did not report whether or not a biologic treatment was included. While nearly all studies (98%) included direct costs, only 22 studies (18%) included indirect costs.

Conclusions

Economic evaluations for AD and CU may be needed in order to better understand the value of new treatments. Moreover, a clearer delineation for biologic treatments and indirect costs (i.e., productivity losses and gains) may be required.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13555-022-00774-2.

Evaluating the quality of the economic evidence in colorectal cancer genomics studies

The increase in the use of genome-based screening and diagnostic tests adds to the overall costs of oncologic care for colorectal cancer. This, in turn, has resulted in an increase in published economic analyses. Aim: To perform a systematic literature review of the available economic evidence evaluating the value of genomic testing for colorectal cancer and appraise the quality of the economic studies conducted to date. Methods: A systematic review of the literature for economic studies of colorectal cancer genomics from January 2006 through October 2020, and evaluation of study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was conducted. The validated QHES was then applied to a final set of articles that met eligibility criteria. Results: Our search of the literature initially yielded 12,859 records. A final set of 49 articles met our inclusion criteria. The QHES score ranged from 24 to 100, with an average score of 82. Most of the studies (n = 40, 82%) scored above 75 and were considered of good quality. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed that most of the economic analyses of colorectal cancer genomic molecular diagnostics in the literature may be of good quality. There is, however, some variation in methodological rigor between the articles.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of preoperative smoking cessation for preventing surgical complications

BACKGROUND

Whilst there is a substantial body of evidence on the costs and benefits of smoking cessation generally, the benefits of routinely providing smoking cessation for surgical populations are less well known. This review summarises the evidence on the cost-effectiveness of preoperative smoking cessation to prevent surgical complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A search of the Cochrane, Econlit, EMBASE, Health Technology Assessment, Medline Complete and Scopus databases was conducted from inception until 23/06/2021. Peer-reviewed, English-language articles describing economic evaluations of preoperative smoking cessation interventions to prevent surgical complications were included. Search results were independently screened for potentially eligible studies. Study characteristics, economic evaluation methods and cost-effectiveness results were extracted by one reviewer and details checked by a second. Two authors independently assessed reporting and methodological quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement (CHEERS) and the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument checklist (QHES) respectively.

RESULTS

After removing duplicates, twenty full text articles were screened from 1423 database records, resulting in six included economic evaluations. Studies from the United States (n = 4), France (n = 1) and Spain (n = 1) were reported between 2009 and 2020. Four evaluations were conducted from a payer perspective. Two-thirds of evaluations were well-conducted (mean score 83) and well-reported (on average, 86% items reported). All studies concluded preoperative smoking cessation is cost-effective for preventing surgical complications; results ranged from cost saving to €53,131 per quality adjusted life year gained.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative smoking cessation is cost-effective for preventing surgical complications from a payer or provider perspective when compared to standard care. There is no evidence from outside the United States and Europe to inform healthcare providers, funders and policy-makers in other jurisdictions and more information is needed to clarify the optimal point of implementation to maximise cost-effectiveness of preoperative smoking cessation intervention.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO 2021 CRD42021257740. RESEARCH REGISTRY REGISTRATION NUMBER: reviewregistry1369.

Cost Utility of Schlemm's Canal Microstent Injection With Cataract Surgery for Open-angle Glaucoma in the US Medicare System

PRCIS

Hydrus microstent (HMS) implantation at the time of cataract surgery appears to be cost-effective in mild-to-moderate glaucoma. However, long-term follow-up is essential for a full assessment of device performance, safety and cost-effectiveness.

PURPOSE

The aim was to assess the societal cost-utility to the US Medicare system of implanting HMS with cataract surgery versus cataract surgery alone in patients with open-angle glaucoma.

PATIENTS

Markov model cohort of patients with mild-to-moderate open-angle glaucoma and visually significant cataract.

METHODS

Patients received HMS during cataract surgery versus cataract surgery alone, in a deterministic model over a 2-year horizon using TreeAge software. Both arms received additional ocular hypotensive agents to control intraocular pressure. Treatment effect of HMS was measured as mean number of ocular hypotensive medications and intraocular pressure, which directly impacted transition probabilities. Health states included the Hodapp-Parrish-Anderson glaucoma stages (mild, moderate, advanced, blind) and death. One-way sensitivity and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted on device efficacy and longer time horizons.

RESULTS

At 2 years, HMS with cataract surgery in mild glaucoma had an incremental cost-utility ratio of USD 38,346.43 per utility gained, compared with cataract surgery alone. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was cost-effective in 61.4% of iterations for HMS+cataract surgery. The probability of side-effects with eye drops, utility decrement with side-effects, cost of the HMS and real-world efficacy rate had the greatest impact on model outcomes. HMS must be 85.60% as effective as published data to maintain cost-effectiveness at a willingness-to-pay threshold of USD 50,000. The incremental cost-utility ratio of HMS with cataract surgery in moderate glaucoma was USD 42,895.38.

CONCLUSIONS

HMS implantation during cataract surgery appears to be cost-effective for patients with mild-to-moderate glaucoma. Nevertheless, more long-term safety and efficacy data are required.

Economic Evaluation of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depression: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of cost-utility studies of internet-based and face-to-face cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) for depression from childhood to adulthood and to examine their reporting and methodological quality.

METHODS

A structured search for cost-utility studies concerning CBT for depression was performed in 7 comprehensive databases from their inception to July 2020. Two reviewers independently screened the literature, abstracted data, and assessed quality using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Quality of Health Economic Studies checklists. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) across all studies. To make a relevant comparison of the ICERs across the identified studies, cost data were inflated to the year 2020 and converted into US dollars.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight studies were included in this review, of which 26 studies (68%) were deemed of high methodological quality and 12 studies (32%) of fair quality. Despite differences in study designs and settings, the conclusions of most included studies for adult depression were general agreement; they showed that face-to-face CBT monotherapy or combination therapy compared with antidepressants and usual care for adult depression were cost-effective from the societal, health system, or payer perspective (ICER -$241 212.4/quality-adjusted life-year [QALY] to $33 032.47/QALY, time horizon 12-60 months). Internet-based CBT regardless of guided or unguided also has a significant cost-effectiveness advantage (ICER -$37 717.52/QALY to $73 841.34/QALY, time horizon 3-36 months). In addition, CBT was cost-effective in preventing depression (ICER -$23 932.07/QALY to $26 092.02/QALY, time horizon 9-60 months). Nevertheless, the evidence for the cost-effectiveness of CBT for children and adolescents was still ambiguous.

CONCLUSIONS

Fair or high-quality evidence showed that CBT monotherapy or combination therapy for adult depression was cost-effective; whether CBT-related therapy was cost-effective for children and adolescents depression remains inconclusive.

Protocol for a systematic review of economic evaluations conducted on gender-transformative interventions aimed at preventing unintended pregnancy and promoting sexual health in adolescents

INTRODUCTION

In the context of family planning and reproductive health, a gender-transformative approach involves helping communities understand and challenge the social norms that perpetuate inequalities between men and women, and improving women's access to key services.The purpose of this systematic review is to synthesise the best available evidence on economic evaluations of gender transformative interventions targeted at preventing unintended pregnancy and promoting sexual health in adolescents, assess the methodological quality of the economic evaluation studies and identify gaps in the evidence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will search the following bibliographic databases for economic evaluations that meet our selection criteria; PubMed, Cochrane, National Health Service EE database, SCOPUS, CINHAL, Web of Science and Paediatric EE Database. We will additionally conduct a grey literature search. The search will be conducted for the period 1 January 1990 to 31 December 2021. Two independent reviewers will conduct the screening, data extraction and quality assessment. We will consider the following outcomes from economic evaluations; relative resource use, cost and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, incremental net benefit ratio or net present value, quality-adjusted life-years and disability-adjusted life-years. Quality assessment will be conducted using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement and the Consensus on Health Economic Criteria checklist. Results will be reported using summary tables and narratively. Attempts will be made to use the Joanna Briggs Institute three-by-three dominance ranking matrix tool to compare relevant cost-effectiveness studies.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval is not required because the review will not use individual patient data, instead publicly available economic evaluation research studies will be used. However, an ethics exemption was obtained from the Stellenbosch University Health Research Ethics Committee, Reference No: X21/05/012. The results of the systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at a relevant scientific conference.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021264698.

The costs, health outcomes and cost-effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Incontinence-associated dermatitis is a common, under-recognized painful skin condition associated with poorer quality of life, increased nurse workloads, and costs.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review economic evidence for the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis.

DESIGN

Systematic review of quantitative research.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database, Econlit, Tufts' Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, and Web of Science.

REVIEW METHODS

A comprehensive search for studies on resource use (costs), health outcomes, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for incontinence-associated dermatitis was conducted. Screening, data extraction, and initial quality assessment were conducted independently by two reviewers, with disagreements/queries regarding quality settled through consensus with the larger team. Quality evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist and results narratively arranged.

FINDINGS

Seventeen studies (10 for prevention, one for treatment and six for both prevention and treatment) included. All studies measured resource use from a healthcare provider perspective; 14 quantified resources in monetary terms. Considerable variation existed in the resource use data primarily due to differences in the type of resources counted, selected time horizons, valuation methods, and reporting approaches. Ten studies provided evidence of their intervention to be cost saving (or at least cost avoiding). Five studies on barrier products provided evidence to be cost saving: three for prevention, one for treatment, and one for both prevention and treatment. Two studies of cleanser and barrier products provided evidence to be cost saving for the prevention and treatment of incontinence-associated dermatitis. One study found a cleanser to be a cost saving preventative intervention. One bowel management system was found to be cost saving over time only, and one nurse education intervention was found to be cost saving for preventing and treating incontinence-associated dermatitis. One barrier product was found to be cost-effective for preventing and treating the condition. Finally, one study found a cleanser and barrier product was time saving for prevention. None of the studies incorporated a multi-attribute quality of life measure; however, two studies included person-reported outcome measures for pain. A narrow range of resources (mainly products) were considered, and there was limited information on how they were counted and valued. Analyses relating to heterogeneity among patients/hospital wards or health facilities and uncertainty were lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Barrier products are possibly a more cost-effective treatment than others; however, this evidence lacks certainty. Structured health economic evaluations are required for a reliable evidence-base on the interventions for incontinence-associated dermatitis.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Most incontinence-associated dermatitis studies lack person-reported outcomes, costs beyond product/staff time, and economic evaluation.

A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation Studies of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in the Middle East and North Africa

INTRODUCTION

Due to the increase in healthcare budget constraint, economic evaluation (EE) evidence is increasingly required to inform resource allocation decisions. This study aimed to systematically review quantity, characteristics, and quality of full EE studies on diagnostic and therapeutic interventions conducted in 26 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus databases were comprehensively searched to identify the published EE studies in the MENA region. The quality of reviewed studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

The search identified 69 studies. The cost-utility approach was adopted in 49 studies (71 %). More than half (38 studies; 55 %) were conducted in Iran and Turkey. Sixteen countries (62 %) did not have any EE studies. The most frequently analyzed therapeutic areas were infectious diseases (19 studies; 28 %), cardiovascular diseases (11 studies; 16 %), and malignancies (10 studies; 14 %). Ten studies (14 %), 46 (67 %), 12 (17 %), and 1 study (1 %) were classified as excellent, high, moderate, and poor quality, respectively. The mean of items reported was 85.10 % (standard deviation 13.32 %). Characterizing heterogeneity, measurement of effectiveness, time horizon, and discount rate were missed in 21 (60 %), 22 (32 %), 20 (29 %) and 15 (25 %) studies, respectively. Data on effectiveness and utility relied primarily on studies conducted outside the region.

CONCLUSIONS

The quantity of EE studies in the MENA region remains low; however, overall quality is high to excellent. The availability of local data, capacity building, and national guidelines are vital to improve both the quantity and quality of EE studies in the region.

Out of Date or Best Before? A Commentary on the Relevance of Economic Evaluations Over Time

The impact of time on the applicability and relevance of historical economic evaluations can be considerable. Ignoring this may lead to the use of weak or invalid evidence to inform important research questions or resource allocation decisions, as historical economic evaluations may have reached different conclusions compared to if a similar study had been conducted more recently. There are multiple factors that contribute towards evidence becoming outdated including changes to the relevant decision problem (e.g. comparators), changes to parameters (such as costs, utilities and resource use) and methodological updates (e.g. recommendations on uncertainty analysis). Researchers reviewing economic evaluations need to consider whether changes over time would influence the study design and results if the evaluation were repeated, to the extent that it is no longer helpful or informative. In this paper, we summarise these key issues and make recommendations about how and whether researchers can future proof their economic evaluations.

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluations Focused on Artificial Intelligence in Healthcare: The Tortoise and the Cheetah

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to systematically review recent health economic evaluations (HEEs) of artificial intelligence (AI) applications in healthcare. The aim was to discuss pertinent methods, reporting quality and challenges for future implementation of AI in healthcare, and additionally advise future HEEs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in 2 databases (PubMed and Scopus) for articles published in the last 5 years. Two reviewers performed independent screening, full-text inclusion, data extraction, and appraisal. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards and Philips checklist were used for the quality assessment of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 884 unique studies were identified; 20 were included for full-text review, covering a wide range of medical specialties and care pathway phases. The most commonly evaluated type of AI was automated medical image analysis models (n = 9, 45%). The prevailing health economic analysis was cost minimization (n = 8, 40%) with the costs saved per case as preferred outcome measure. A total of 9 studies (45%) reported model-based HEEs, 4 of which applied a time horizon >1 year. The evidence supporting the chosen analytical methods, assessment of uncertainty, and model structures was underreported. The reporting quality of the articles was moderate as on average studies reported on 66% of Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards items.

CONCLUSIONS

HEEs of AI in healthcare are limited and often focus on costs rather than health impact. Surprisingly, model-based long-term evaluations are just as uncommon as model-based short-term evaluations. Consequently, insight into the actual benefits offered by AI is lagging behind current technological developments.

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.

A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic evaluations in genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders

PURPOSE

Understanding the value of genetic screening and testing for monogenic disorders requires high-quality, methodologically robust economic evaluations. This systematic review sought to assess the methodological quality among such studies and examined opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, and Web of Science for economic evaluations of genetic screening/testing (2013-2019). Methodological rigor and adherence to best practices were systematically assessed using the British Medical Journal checklist.

RESULTS

Across the 47 identified studies, there were substantial variations in modeling approaches, reporting detail, and sophistication. Models ranged from simple decision trees to individual-level microsimulations that compared between 2 and >20 alternative interventions. Many studies failed to report sufficient detail to enable replication or did not justify modeling assumptions, especially for costing methods and utility values. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, or calibration were rarely used to derive parameter estimates. Nearly all studies conducted some sensitivity analysis, and more sophisticated studies implemented probabilistic sensitivity/uncertainty analysis, threshold analysis, and value of information analysis.

CONCLUSION

We describe a heterogeneous body of work and present recommendations and exemplar studies across the methodological domains of (1) perspective, scope, and parameter selection; (2) use of uncertainty/sensitivity analyses; and (3) reporting transparency for improvement in the economic evaluation of genetic screening/testing.

Digital interventions in mental health: evidence syntheses and economic modelling

BACKGROUND

Economic evaluations provide evidence on whether or not digital interventions offer value for money, based on their costs and outcomes relative to the costs and outcomes of alternatives.

OBJECTIVES

(1) Evaluate and summarise published economic studies about digital interventions across different technologies, therapies, comparators and mental health conditions; (2) synthesise clinical evidence about digital interventions for an exemplar mental health condition; (3) construct an economic model for the same exemplar mental health condition using the previously synthesised clinical evidence; and (4) consult with stakeholders about how they understand and assess the value of digital interventions.

METHODS

We completed four work packages: (1) a systematic review and quality assessment of economic studies about digital interventions; (2) a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; (3) an economic model and value-of-information analysis on digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder; and (4) a series of knowledge exchange face-to-face and digital seminars with stakeholders.

RESULTS

In work package 1, we reviewed 76 economic evaluations: 11 economic models and 65 within-trial analyses. Although the results of the studies are not directly comparable because they used different methods, the overall picture suggests that digital interventions are likely to be cost-effective, compared with no intervention and non-therapeutic controls, whereas the value of digital interventions compared with face-to-face therapy or printed manuals is unclear. In work package 2, we carried out two network meta-analyses of 20 randomised controlled trials of digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder with a total of 2350 participants. The results were used to inform our economic model, but when considered on their own they were inconclusive because of the very wide confidence intervals. In work package 3, our decision-analytic model found that digital interventions for generalised anxiety disorder were associated with lower net monetary benefit than medication and face-to-face therapy, but greater net monetary benefit than non-therapeutic controls and no intervention. Value for money was driven by clinical outcomes rather than by intervention costs, and a value-of-information analysis suggested that uncertainty in the treatment effect had the greatest value (£12.9B). In work package 4, stakeholders identified several areas of benefits and costs of digital interventions that are important to them, including safety, sustainability and reducing waiting times. Four factors may influence their decisions to use digital interventions, other than costs and outcomes: increasing patient choice, reaching underserved populations, enabling continuous care and accepting the 'inevitability of going digital'.

LIMITATIONS

There was substantial uncertainty around effect estimates of digital interventions compared with alternatives. This uncertainty was driven by the small number of studies informing most comparisons, the small samples in some of these studies and the studies' high risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital interventions may offer good value for money as an alternative to 'doing nothing' or 'doing something non-therapeutic' (e.g. monitoring or having a general discussion), but their added value compared with medication, face-to-face therapy and printed manuals is uncertain. Clinical outcomes rather than intervention costs drive 'value for money'.

FUTURE WORK

There is a need to develop digital interventions that are more effective, rather than just cheaper, than their alternatives.

STUDY REGISTRATION

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42018105837.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 26, No. 1. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Acknowledging Patient Heterogeneity in Economic Evaluations in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Schizophrenia is a severe mental illness with heterogeneous etiology, range of symptoms, and course of illness. Cost-effectiveness analysis often applies averages from populations, which disregards patient heterogeneity even though there are a range of methods available to acknowledge patient heterogeneity. This review evaluates existing economic evaluations of interventions in schizophrenia to understand how patient heterogeneity is currently reflected in economic evaluation.

METHODS

Electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycINFO via Ovid and the Health Technology Assessment database were run to identify full economic evaluations of interventions aiming to reduce the symptoms associated with schizophrenia. Two levels of screening were used, and explicit inclusion criteria were applied. Prespecified data extraction and critical appraisal were performed.

RESULTS

Seventy-six relevant studies were identified. More than half (41 of 76) of the articles acknowledged patient heterogeneity in some way through discussion or methods. There was a range of patient characteristics considered, including demographics and socioeconomic factors (eg, age, educational level, ethnicity), clinical characteristics (eg, symptom severity, comorbidities), and preferences (eg, preferences related to outcomes or symptoms). Subgroup analyses were rarely reported (8 of 76).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient heterogeneity was frequently mentioned in studies but was rarely thoroughly investigated in the identified economic evaluations. When investigated, included patient characteristics and methods were found to be heterogeneous. Understanding and acknowledging patient heterogeneity may alter the conclusions of cost-effectiveness evaluations; subsequently, we would encourage further research in this area.

Cost-Effectiveness of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Urothelial Carcinoma-A Review

Simple Summary

Urothelial carcinoma is a malignancy that originates in the genitourinary tract. It is a heterogeneous disease that can present at different stages, and the treatment options vary in efficacy. Advances in immunotherapy stimulated adoption in urothelial carcinoma, and published trials have shown promising results when compared to conventional therapies. However, oncologic drugs are historically costly, and immunotherapy is no exception. A cost-effectiveness analysis is a standardized method of weighing the clinical benefits of an intervention against the financial burden to obtain a composite proposed value. Multiple investigators have assessed immunotherapy in urothelial carcinoma, but no consensus has been reached. Here, we aim to review the literature of the available cost-effectiveness studies to summarize the results and determine the current value of systemic immunotherapy compared to standard treatment. Positive findings will support continued efforts to adopt immunotherapy, whereas negative findings will identify potential gaps for improvement in cost-effectiveness.

Abstract

Over the last decade, an increasing number of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have been assessed for therapeutic efficacy in urothelial carcinoma (UC). The high cost has prompted multiple cost-effectiveness analyses for the various disease stages, with no established consensus. We reviewed the literature to assess the available cost-effectiveness studies and summarize their findings. Studies were filtered for a calculated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) to standardize comparison. Over 2600 articles were narrowed to eight primary investigations: one for BCG-refractory non-muscle invasive (NMI), one for neoadjuvant therapy in muscle-invasive (MI), and six for advanced disease. Cost-effectiveness was not achieved for NMI disease. Atezolizumab met the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold as neoadjuvant therapy for MI disease compared to chemotherapy, but with multiple limitations on the interpretation. Of the six studies on advanced disease, the results were mixed. This was at least partially attributable to varied methodologies including extrapolated time horizons, inconsistent cost inputs, and different WTP thresholds. Overall, the aggregate results were not compelling enough to establish ICIs as cost-effective compared to conventional chemotherapy. Value may improve with continued investigation into long-term outcomes, refined patient selection, and pricing discounts.

Health economic analyses of secondary vaccine effects: a systematic review and policy insights

INTRODUCTION

: Numerous analyses demonstrate substantial health economic impacts of primary vaccine effects (preventing or mitigating clinical manifestations of the diseases they target), but vaccines may also be associated with secondary effects, previously known as non-specific, heterologous, or off-target effects.

AREAS COVERED

: We define key concepts to distinguish primary and secondary vaccine effects for health economic analyses, summarized terminology used in different fields, and perform a systematic review of health economic analyses focused on secondary vaccine effects (SVEs).

EXPERT OPINION

: Health economists integrate evidence from multiple fields, which often use incomplete or inconsistent definitions. Like regulators and policy makers, health economists require high-quality evidence of specific effects. Consistent with the limited evidence on mechanisms of action for SVEs, the associated health economic literature remains highly limited, with 4 studies identified by our systematic review. The lack of specific and well-controlled evidence that supports quantification of specific SVEs limits the consideration of these effects in vaccine research, development, regulatory, and recommendation decisions and health economic analyses.

Protocol for a systematic review of economic evaluations of preoperative smoking cessation interventions for preventing surgical complications

INTRODUCTION

The short-term economic benefit of embedding best practice tobacco dependence treatment (TDT) into healthcare services prior to surgery across different populations and jurisdictions is largely unknown. The aim of this systematic review is to summarise the cost-effectiveness of preoperative smoking cessation interventions for preventing surgical complications compared with usual care. The results will provide hospital managers, clinicians, healthcare professionals and policymakers with a critical summary of the economic evidence on providing TDT routinely before surgery, aiding the development and dissemination of unified, best practice guidelines, that is, implementation of article 14 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A comprehensive search of peer-reviewed literature will be conducted from database inception until 23 June 2021 (Cochrane, Econlit, Embase, Health Technology Assessment, Medline Complete, Scopus). Published, English-language articles describing economic evaluations of preoperative smoking cessation interventions for preventing surgical complications will be included. One researcher will complete the searches and two researchers will independently screen results for eligible studies. Any disagreement will be resolved by the third researcher. A narrative summary of included studies will be provided. Study characteristics, economic evaluation methods and cost-effectiveness results will be extracted by one reviewer and descriptive analyses will be undertaken. A second reviewer will review data extracted for accuracy from 10% of the included studies. Reporting and methodological quality of the included studies will be evaluated independently by two reviewers using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement and the Quality of Health Economic Studies Instrument checklist, respectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This research does not require ethics approval because the study is a planned systematic review of published literature. Findings will be presented at health economic, public health and tobacco control conferences, published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated via social media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021257740.

Cost-Effectiveness of Medicinal Cannabis for Management of Refractory Symptoms Associated With Chronic Conditions: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

OBJECTIVES

Although there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that cannabinoids may relieve symptoms of some illnesses, they are relatively high-cost therapies compared with illicit growth and supply. This article aimed to comprehensively review economic evaluations of medicinal cannabis for alleviating refractory symptoms associated with chronic conditions.

METHODS

Seven electronic databases were searched for articles published up to September 6, 2020. The quality of reporting of economic evaluations was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. The extracted data were grouped into subcategories according to types of medical conditions, organized into tables, and reported narratively.

RESULTS

This review identified 12 cost-utility analyses conducted across a variety of diseases including multiple sclerosis (MS) (N = 8), pediatric drug-resistant epilepsies (N = 2), and chronic pain (N = 2). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio varied widely from cost saving to more than US$451 800 per quality-adjusted life-year depending on the setting, perspectives, types of medicinal cannabis, and indications. Nabiximols is a cost-effective intervention for MS spasticity in multiple European settings. Cannabidiol was found to be a cost-effective for Dravet syndrome in a Canadian setting whereas a cost-utility analysis conducted in a US setting deemed cannabidiol to be not cost-effective for Lennox-Gastaut syndrome. Overall study quality was good, with publications meeting 70% to 100% (median 83%) of the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

Medicinal cannabis-based products may be cost-effective treatment options for MS spasticity, Dravet syndrome, and neuropathic pain, although the literature is nascent. Well-designed clinical trials and health economic evaluations are needed to generate adequate clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence to assist in resource allocation.

Economic Evaluations of Child Nutrition Interventions in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal

Economic evaluation is crucial for cost-effective resource allocation to improve child nutrition in low and middle-income countries (LMICs). However, the quality of published economic evaluations in these settings is not well understood. This systematic review aimed to assess the quality of existing economic evaluations of child nutrition interventions in LMICs and synthesize the study characteristics and economic evidence. We searched 9 electronic databases, including MEDLINE, with the following concepts: economic evaluation, children, nutrition, and LMICs. All types of interventions addressing malnutrition, including stunting, wasting, micronutrient deficiency, and overweight, were identified. We included economic evaluations that examined both costs and effects published in English peer-reviewed journals and used the Drummond checklist for quality appraisal. We present findings through a narrative synthesis. Sixty-nine studies with diverse settings, perspectives, time horizons, and outcome measures were included. Most studies used data from sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia and addressed undernutrition. The mortality rate, intervention effect, intervention coverage, cost, and discount rate were reported as predictors among studies that performed sensitivity analyses. Despite the heterogeneity of included studies and the possibility of publication bias, 81% of included studies concluded that nutrition interventions were cost-effective or cost-beneficial, mostly based on a country's cost-effectiveness thresholds. Regarding quality assessment, the studies published after 2016 met more criteria than studies published before 2016. Most studies had well-stated research questions, forms of economic evaluation, interventions, and conclusions. However, reporting the perspective of the analyses, justification of discount rates, and describing the role of funders and ethics approval were identified as areas needing improvement. The gaps in the quality of reporting could be improved by consolidated guidance on the publication of economic evaluations and the use of appropriate quality appraisal checklists. Strengthening the evidence base for child malnutrition across different regions is necessary to inform cost-effective investment in LMICs. Trial registration: PROSPERO CRD42020194445.

Population or family history based BRCA gene tests of breast cancer? A systematic review of economic evaluations

BACKGROUND

Nearly 56% of at-risk carriers are not identified and missed as a result of the current family-history (FH) screening for genetic testing. The present study aims to review the economic evaluation studies on BRCA genetic testing strategies for screening and early detection of breast cancer.

METHODS

This systematic literature review is conducted within the Cochrane Library, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest, and EMBASE databases. In this paper, the relevant published economic evaluation studies are identified by following the standard Cochrane Collaboration methods and adherence to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement reporting some recommendations for articles up to March 2020. Thereafter, the inclusion and exclusion criteria are applied to screen the articles. Disagreements are resolved through a consensus meeting. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist is used in the evaluation of quality. Finally, a narrative synthesis is performed. To compare the different levels of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the net present value is calculated based on a discount rate of 3% in 2019.

RESULTS

Among 788 initially retrieved citations, 12 studies were included. More than 60% of the studies were originated from high-income countries and were published after 2016. It is noteworthy that most of the studies evaluated the payer perspective. Moreover, the robustness of the results were analyzed through one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses in nearly 66% of these studies. Nearly, 25% of the studies are focused and defined population-based and family history BRCA tests as comparators; afterwards, the cost-effectiveness of the former was confirmed. The highest and lowest absolute values for the ICERs were $65,661 and $9 per quality adjusted life years, respectively. All studies met over 70% of the CHEERs criteria checklist, which was considered as 93% of high quality on average as well.

CONCLUSIONS

The genetic BRCA tests for the general population as well as unselected breast cancer patients were cost-effective in high and upper-middle income countries and those with prevalence of gene mutation while population-based genetic tests for low-middle income countries are depended on the price of the tests.

Does drug dispensing improve the health outcomes of patients attending community pharmacies? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Drug dispensing is a clinical pharmacy service that promotes access to medicines and their rational use. However, there is a lack of evidence for the impact of drug dispensing on patients' health outcomes. Thus, the purpose of this study was to assess the influence of drug dispensing on the clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes of patients attending community pharmacies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in April 2021 using PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and Open Thesis. Two reviewers screened titles, abstracts, and full-text articles according to the eligibility criteria. Methodological quality was assessed using tools from the Joanna Briggs Institute, and the literature was synthesized narratively.

RESULTS

We retrieved 3,685 articles and included nine studies that presented 13 different outcomes. Regarding the design, they were cross-sectional (n = 4), randomized clinical trials (n = 4), and quasi-experimental (n = 1). A positive influence of drug dispensing on health outcomes was demonstrated through six clinical, four humanistic and three economic outcomes. Eight studies (88,9 %) used intermediate outcomes. The assessment of methodological quality was characterized by a lack of clarity and/or lack of information in primary studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Most articles included in this review reported a positive influence of drug dispensing performed by community pharmacists on patients' health outcomes. The findings of this study may be of interest to patients, pharmacists, decision makers, and healthcare systems, since they may contribute to evidence-based decision-making, strengthening the contribution of community pharmacists to health care.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registration: PROSPERO CRD42020191701 .

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Malaria Control Interventions: A Systematic Literature Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the literature on the unit cost and cost-effectiveness of malaria control.

METHODS

Ten databases and gray literature sources were searched to identify evidence relevant to the period 2005 to 2018. Studies with primary financial or economic cost data from malaria endemic countries that took a provider, provider and household, or societal perspective were included.

RESULTS

We identified 103 costing studies. The majority of studies focused on individual rather than combined interventions, notably insecticide-treated bed nets and treatment, and commonly took a provider perspective. A third of all studies took place in 3 countries. The median provider economic cost of protecting 1 person per year ranged from $1.18 to $5.70 with vector control and from $0.53 to $5.97 with chemoprevention. The median provider economic cost per case diagnosed with rapid diagnostic tests was $6.06 and per case treated $9.31 or $89.93 depending on clinical severity. Other interventions did not share enough similarities to be summarized. Cost drivers were rarely reported. Cost-effectiveness of malaria control was reiterated, but care in methodological and reporting standards is required to enhance data transferability.

CONCLUSIONS

Important information that can support resource allocation was reviewed. Given the variability in methods and reporting, global efforts to follow existing standards are required for the evidence to be most useful outside their study context, supplemented by guidance on options for transferring existing data across settings.

A systematic review of fear of cancer recurrence related healthcare use and intervention cost-effectiveness

OBJECTIVE

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is a common and burdensome psychological condition affecting cancer survivors. This systematic review aims to synthesise current evidence regarding: (1) FCR-related healthcare usage and costs and (2) the cost-effectiveness of FCR treatments.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane and other electronic databases using MeSH headings and keywords for cancer, FCR and costs from their inception to September 2019. Identified studies were screened for eligibility. Original, peer-reviewed journal articles reporting quantitative data from samples of adults treated for cancer written in English were included. Quality was appraised using the Drummond checklist for economic evaluations or the relevant Joanna Briggs Institute Critical Appraisal Tool.

RESULTS

Data from 11 studies were extracted and synthesised. Seven studies addressed the costs of FCR and suggested an increase in the use of primary and secondary healthcare. Four studies addressed the cost-effectiveness of different FCR treatments and suggest that some treatments may cost-effectively reduce FCR and improve quality of life. Reviewed treatments had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between AU$3,233 and AU$152,050 per quality-adjusted life year gained when adjusted to 2019 Australian dollars. All studies were of sufficient quality to be synthesised in this review.

CONCLUSIONS

FCR appears to be associated with greater use of certain healthcare resources, and FCR may be treated cost-effectively. Thus, appropriate FCR treatments may not only reduce the individual burden, but also the strain on the healthcare system. Further high-quality research is needed to confirm this and ensure the future implementation of efficient and sustainable FCR treatments.

Adherence to country-specific guidelines among economic evaluations undertaken in three high-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the adherence of economic evaluations to the recommendations on principles of economic evaluation as stated in the country-specific guidelines for three countries across different income groups, namely, Canada, South Africa, and Egypt.

METHODS

Searches were undertaken in three databases to identify economic evaluations meeting predefined inclusion criteria. Methodological and reporting standards listed in the country-specific guidelines were converted into discrete binary variables to calculate mean adherence scores. Quality appraisal was done using Drummond's checklist. Stratified analysis was undertaken to identify independent variables affecting adherence.

RESULTS

We identified forty-four, seventy-nine, and sixteen economic evaluations for Canada, South Africa, and Egypt, respectively. The mean adherence score was the highest for Canada (71%), followed by South Africa (65%) and Egypt (60%). Adherence to guidelines was positively correlated with quality of studies, r = .72. Furthermore, the mean adherence score was significantly (p < .05) higher for studies using a cost-utility analysis design (72%), having local/national funding aid (72%), undertaken by a health economist (71%) and for pharmacoeconomic evaluations (70%).

CONCLUSION

The quality of economic evaluations improves with adherence to country-specific guidelines. Locally funded and health-economist led health technology assessments (HTAs) should be encouraged for greater adherence to the guidelines. The HTA researchers and the HTA bodies should lay emphasis on adherence to the country-specific guidelines for improving the quality of HTA evidence.

A systematic review of economic evaluations of web-based or telephone-delivered interventions for preventing overweight and obesity and/or improving obesity-related behaviors

Obesity prevention interventions with behavioral or lifestyle-related components delivered via web-based or telephone technologies have been reported as comparatively low cost as compared with other intervention delivery modes, yet to date, no synthesized evidence of cost-effectiveness has been published. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of obesity prevention interventions with a telehealth or eHealth intervention component. A systematic search of six academic databases was conducted through October 2020. Studies were included if they reported full economic evaluations of interventions aimed at preventing overweight or obesity, or interventions aimed at improving obesity-related behaviors, with at least one intervention component delivered by telephone (telehealth) or web-based technology (eHealth). Findings were reported narratively, based on the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards. Twenty-seven economic evaluations were included from 20 studies meeting the inclusion criteria. Sixteen of the included interventions had a telehealth component, whereas 11 had an eHealth component. Seventeen interventions were evaluated using cost-utility analysis, five with cost-effectiveness analysis, and five undertook both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses. Only eight cost-utility analyses reported that the intervention was cost-effective. Comparison of results from cost-effectiveness analyses was limited by heterogeneity in methods and outcome units reported. The evidence supporting the cost-effectiveness of interventions with a telehealth or eHealth delivery component is currently inconclusive. Although obesity prevention telehealth and eHealth interventions are gaining popularity, more evidence is required on their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness.

Current State of Health Economic Analyses for Low-Grade Glioma Management: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Health economic analyses help determine the value of a medical intervention by assessing the costs and outcomes associated with it. The objective of this study was to assess the level of evidence in economic evaluations for low-grade glioma (LGG) management.

METHODS

Following the PRISMA guidelines, we conducted a systematic review of English articles in Medline, Embase, The Central Registration Depository, EconPapers, and EconLit. The results were screened, and data were extracted by 2 independent reviewers for studies reporting economic evaluations for LGG. The quality of each study was evaluated using the CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) checklist, the hierarchy scale developed by Cooper et al. (2005), and the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument.

RESULTS

Three studies met our inclusion criteria. The adjusted incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) values for the included studies ranged from $3934 to $9936, but each evaluated a different aspect of LGG management. All had a good quality of reporting per the CHEERS checklist. Based on the Cooper et al. hierarchy scale, the quality of data use was lacking most for utilities. The quality of study design was scored as 82, 92, and 100 for each study using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument.

CONCLUSIONS

Although a limited number of economic evaluations were identified, the studies evaluated here were well designed. The interventions assessed were all considered cost-effective, but pooled analysis was not possible because of heterogeneity in the interventions assessed. Given the importance of value and cost-effectiveness in medical care, more evidence is needed in this area.

Replication of Published Health Economic Obesity Models: Assessment of Facilitators, Hurdles and Reproduction Success

OBJECTIVES

This research aims to (1) replicate published health economic models, (2) compare reproduced results with original results, (3) identify facilitators and hurdles to model replicability and determine reproduction success, and (4) suggest model replication reporting standards to enhance model reproducibility, in the context of health economic obesity models.

METHODS

Four health economic obesity models simulating an adult UK population were identified, selected for replication, and evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Reproduction results were compared to original results, focusing on cost-effectiveness outcomes, and the resulting reproduction success was assessed by published criteria. Replication facilitators and hurdles were identified and transferred into related reporting standards.

RESULTS

All four case studies were state-transition models simulating costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Comparing original versus reproduction outcomes, the following deviation ranges were observed: costs - 3.9 to 16.1% (mean over all model simulations 3.78%), QALYs - 3.7 to 2.1% (mean - 0.11%), and average cost-utility ratios - 3.0 to 17.9% (mean 4.28%). Applying different published criteria, an overall reproduction success was observed for three of four models. Key replication facilitators were input data tables and model diagrams, while missing standard deviations and missing formulas for equations were considered as key hurdles.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the feasibility of rebuilding health economic obesity models, but minor to major assumptions were needed to fill reporting gaps. Model replications can help to assess the quality of health economic model documentation and can be used to validate current model reporting practices. Simple changes to actual CHEERS reporting criteria may solve identified replication hurdles.

A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of Health-Promoting Food Retail-Based Interventions

BACKGROUND

While the number of retail interventions with impacts on diet- and/or health-related outcomes is increasing, the economic evaluation literature is limited. This review investigated (i) the cost-effectiveness of health-promoting food retail interventions and (ii) key assumptions adopted in these evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic review of published academic studies was undertaken (CRD42020153763). Fourteen databases were searched. Eligible studies were identified, analysed, and reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Eight studies that evaluated 30 retail interventions were included in the review. Common outcomes reported were cost per healthy food item purchased/served or cost per disability-adjusted life year (DALY) averted. Four studies undertook cost-utility analyses and half of these studies concluded that retail interventions were cost-effective in improving health outcomes. Most studies did not state any assumptions regarding compensatory behaviour (i.e., purchases/consumption of non-intervention foods or food purchases/consumption from non-intervention settings) and presumed that sales data were indicative of consumption.

CONCLUSION

The cost-effectiveness of retail-based health-promoting interventions is inconclusive. Future health-promoting retail interventions should regularly include an economic evaluation which addresses key assumptions related to compensatory behaviour and the use of sales data as a proxy for consumption.

Systematic literature review of the economic burden of spinal muscular atrophy and economic evaluations of treatments

Background

Spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) is a rare and devastating condition for which new disease-modifying treatments have recently been approved. Given the increasing importance of economic considerations in healthcare decision-making, this review summarizes the studies assessing the cost of SMA and economic evaluations of treatments. A systematic review of the literature in PubMed and Scopus up to 15 September 2020 was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines.

Results

Nine studies reporting the annual cost of care of patients with SMA and six evaluations of the cost-effectiveness of SMA treatments were identified. The average annual cost of SMA1, the most frequent and severe form in which symptoms appear before the age of 6 months were similar according to the different studies, ranged from $75,047 to $196,429 per year. The yearly costs for the forms of the later-onset form, called SMA2, SMA3, and SMA4, which were usually pooled in estimates of healthcare costs, were more variable, ranging from $27,157 to $82,474. The evaluations of cost-effectiveness of treatment compared nusinersen treatment against standard of care (n = 3), two treatments (nusinersen and onasemnogene abeparvovec) against each other and no drug treatment (n = 1), nusinersen versus onasemnogene abeparvovec (n = 1), and standard of care versus nusinersen with and without newborn screening (n = 1). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of nusinersen compared to standard of care in SMA1 ranged from $210,095 to $1,150,455 per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained and that for onasemnogene abeparvovec ranged from $32,464 to $251,403. For pre-symptomatic patients, the ICER value ranged from $206,409 to $735,519. The ICERs for later-onset forms of SMA (2, 3 and 4) were more diverse ranging from $275,943 to $8,438,049.

Conclusion

This review confirms the substantial cost burden of standard of care for SMA patients and the high cost-effectiveness ratios of the approved drugs at the current price when delivered in post-symptomatic patients. Since few studies have been conducted so far, there is a need for further prospective and independent economic studies in pre- and post-symptomatic patients.

The Methodological Quality and Challenges in Conducting Economic Evaluations of Newborn Screening: A Scoping Review

INTRODUCTION

Cost-effectiveness (CEA) and cost-utility analyses (CUA) have become popular types of economic evaluations (EE) used for evidence-based decision-making in healthcare resource allocation. Newborn screening programs (NBS) can have significant clinical benefits for society, and cost-effectiveness analysis may help to select the optimal strategy among different screening programs, including the no-screening option, on different conditions. These economic analyses of NBS, however, are hindered by several methodological challenges. This study explored the methodological quality in recent NBS economic evaluations and analyzed the main challenges and strategies adopted by researchers to deal with them.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted according to PRISMA methodology to identify CEAs and CUAs of NBS. The methodological quality of the retrieved studies was assessed quantitatively using a specific guideline for the quality assessment of NBS economic evaluations, by calculating a general score for each EE. Challenges in the studies were then explored using thematic analysis as a qualitative synthesis approach.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies met the inclusion criteria. The quantitative analysis showed that the methodological quality of NBS economic evaluations was heterogeneous. Lack of clear description of items related to results, discussion, and discounting were the most frequent flaws. Methodological challenges in performing EEs of neonatal screenings include the adoption of a long time horizon, the use of quality-adjusted life years as health outcome measure, and the assessment of costs beyond the screening interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review can support future economic evaluation research, aiding researchers to develop a methodological guidance to perform EEs aimed at producing solid results to inform decisions for resource allocation in neonatal screening.

Economic analyses of mental health and substance use interventions in the workplace: a systematic literature review and narrative synthesis

Mental illness and substance use disorders in the workplace have been increasingly recognised as a problem in most countries; however, evidence is scarce on which solutions provide the highest return on investment. We searched academic and grey literature databases and additional sources for studies that included a workplace intervention for mental health or substance abuse, or both, and that did an economic analysis. We analysed the papers we found to identify the highest yielding and most cost-effective interventions by disorder. On the basis of 56 studies, we found moderate strength of evidence that cognitive behavioural therapy is cost-saving (and in some cases cost-effective) to address depression. We observed strong evidence that regular and active involvement of occupational health professionals is cost-saving and cost-effective in reducing sick leave related to mental health and in encouraging return to work. We identified moderate evidence that coverage for pharmacotherapy and brief counselling for smoking cessation are both cost-saving and cost-effective. Addressing mental health and substance misuse in the workplace improves workers' wellbeing and productivity, and benefits employers' bottom line (ie, profit). Future economic analyses would benefit from the consideration of subgroup analyses, examination of longer follow-ups, inclusion of statistical and sensitivity analyses and discussion around uncertainty, and consideration of potential for bias.

Use of real-world evidence in meta-analyses and cost-effectiveness models

Real-world evidence (RWE) provides external validity, supplementing and enhancing the randomized controlled trial data with valuable information on patient behaviors and outcomes, turning efficacy and safety results into real-world effectiveness and risks, but the use of RWE is associated with challenges. The objectives of this communication were to (1) summarize all guidance on how to conduct an RWE meta-analysis (MA) and how to develop an RWE cost-effectiveness model, (2) to describe our experience, challenges faced and solutions identified, (3) to provide recommendations on how to conduct such analyses. No formal guidelines on how to conduct an RWE MA or to develop an RWE cost-effectiveness model were identified. Using the context of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants in stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation, we conducted an RWE MA, after having identified sources of uncertainty. We then implemented the results in an RWE cost-effectiveness model, defined as a model where all inputs come from RWE, including all parameters related to treatment effect. Based on challenges faced, our first recommendation relates to the necessity of conducting sensitivity analyses, either based on clinical or methodological considerations. Our second recommendation is the need for extensive collaboration with a wide range of experts, during the development of the analyses protocols, the implementation of the analyses and the interpretation of the results. RWE may address a number of gaps related to the treatment effect, and RWE economic evaluations for the treatment effect can provide extremely valuable insights into real-world economic value of interventions. As the increased recognition of the value of RWE could influence health technology assessment decision, and current practices, this communication supports the urgent need of more formal guidelines.