Economic Evaluation of Budesonide Orodispersible Tablets for the Treatment of Eosinophilic Esophagitis: A Cost–Utility Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Beauchemin ◽  
A. Castonguay ◽  
E. S. Chan ◽  
E. S. Dellon ◽  
B. G. Feagan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Eosinophilic Esophagitis ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Orodispersible Tablets

scholarly journals Health economic measures in schizophrenia research

2007 ◽  
Vol 191 (S50) ◽  
pp. s42-s45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul McCrone
Keyword(s):  
Health Economic ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Outcome Data ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Economic Evaluations ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Short Term ◽  
Effectiveness Analysis

BackgroundIt is essential in economic evaluations of schizophrenia interventions that all relevant costs are identified and measured appropriately Also of importance is the way in which cost data are combined with information on outcomesAimsTo examine the use of health economicsin evaluations of interventions for schizophreniaMethodsAreview of the key methods used to estimate costs and to link costs and outcomes was conductedResultsCosts fall on a number of different agencies and can be short term or long term. Cost-effectiveness analysis and cost-utility analysis are the most appropriate methods for combing cost and outcome dataConclusionsSchizophrenia poses a number of challenges for economic evaluation

An Economic Evaluation of Treatments for HIV-Associated Facial Lipoatrophy: A Cost-Utility Analysis

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (5) ◽  
pp. 386-395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sirianong Peyasantiwong ◽  
Mona R. Loutfy ◽  
Audrey Laporte ◽  
Peter C. Coyte
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Facial Lipoatrophy

Economic Evaluation of CAM Use

2017 ◽  
pp. 232-271
Author(s):  
Li-Chia Chen ◽  
Mayuree Tangkiatkumjai
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Conventional Medicine ◽  
Kidney Diseases ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Healthcare Interventions

Economic evaluation (EE) of health care interventions has been used to inform and affect policy decision-making by considering both costs and outcomes of the interventions. National guidelines in many countries consider cost-effectiveness evidence for making recommendations of healthcare interventions. In such case, EE of complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is crucial to guide reimbursement decision-making. However, there is currently a lack of cost-effectiveness evidence of using CAM for kidney diseases. There are three types of full EEs, including a cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness, and cost-utility analysis, of which, results of cost-utility analysis is preferred and widely used by healthcare authorities in several developed countries. General approaches for EE of conventional medicine are likely to be applied to assess economic outcomes of CAM for kidney diseases. This chapter depicts the overall principles of EEs, interpretations of economic results and summaries the currently available EE for CAM.

scholarly journals Cost–utility analysis of a multicomponent intervention for fibromyalgia syndrome in primary care versus usual clinical practice: study protocol for an economic evaluation of a randomised control trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e043562
Author(s):  
Victoria Mailen Arfuch ◽  
Carina Aguilar Martín ◽  
Anna Berenguera ◽  
Rosa Caballol Angelats ◽  
Noèlia Carrasco-Querol ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Economic Evaluation ◽  
Fibromyalgia Syndrome ◽  
Cost Utility ◽  
Cost Utility Analysis ◽  
Randomised Control Trial ◽  
Utility Analysis ◽  
Intervention Programme ◽  
Link Type ◽  
Multicomponent Intervention ◽  
The Cost

IntroductionFibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) imposes a high cost on society. The significant economic burden from the use of healthcare and, especially, social resources is a spur to revising the usual clinical care (UCC) and to improving treatment strategies. FMS has a deleterious effect on the quality of life (QOL) and productivity, which considerably increase the indirect costs to society. This study reports an economic evaluation comparing the cost and health benefits in a multicomponent intervention programme and UCC of patients with FMS who attend primary healthcare centres of the Gerència Territorial Terres de L’Ebre region of Catalonia, Spain. This article is linked to the pre-results of a randomised control trial study on the implementation of this intervention programme (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04049006).Method and analysisA cost–utility analysis will be conducted from a societal perspective. Quality-adjusted life years will be calculated from the results of the SF-36 questionnaire, a QOL measurement instrument. Direct and indirect healthcare costs will be obtained from official prices and reports published by the Spanish Public Health Administration and the National Statistics Institute. The incremental cost–utility ratio will be estimated to compare the two healthcare practices. Deterministic sensitivity analysis will also be used to compare different cost scenarios, modifying the items with the highest weight in the cost composition.Ethics and disseminationThe Clinical Research Ethics Committee of the IDIAPJGol Institute approved this study on 25 April 2018 (code P18/068) in accordance with the Helsinki/Tokyo Declaration. Information will be provided orally and in writing to participants, and their informed consent will be required. Participant anonymity will be guaranteed. The dissemination strategy includes publications in scientific journals and presentations in local and national media and at academic conferences.Trial registration number:NCT04049006; Pre-results.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document