PMU29 ECONOMIC EVALUATION FOR THE TREATMENT OF ACUTE BACTERIAL SKIN AND SKIN STRUCTURES INFECTIONS (ABSSSI) FROM THE NATIONAL PAYER PERSPECTIVE: INTRODUCTION OF A NEW TREATMENT INTO THE PATIENT JOURNEY. SIMULATION IN 3 EUROPEAN COUNTRIES

Abstract Objective To classify, analyze, and compare published guidelines for economic evaluation within health technology assessment (HTA) in European countries and highlight differences and similarities. Methods We performed a literature review to identify published guidance for the conduct and assessment of economic evaluation studies that are undertaken within the context of HTA processes in European countries. Organizations and working groups were identified via the ISPOR, INAHTA, and EUnetHTA databases. Following the identification of official documents, we performed a qualitative content analysis to highlight discrepancies or common practices under the following categories: comparator, perspective on costs/benefits, time horizon, economic evaluation method, instrument used for utility measurement, outcome measure, source for efficacy, modeling, sensitivity analysis, discounting, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results A total of nineteen guidance documents were identified (in English) providing data for the analysis in nineteen countries. The comparative content analysis identified common practices in most countries regarding the approaches to the choice of comparator, source of data, the preferred economic evaluation method, the option for a lifetime analytical horizon, discounting, and the choice of key outcome measure—for which, most countries recommend the use of the EQ-5D instrument. Differences were mainly found in the choice of perspective, dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity analysis, the use of end points, and the required use of modeling. Conclusions The use of economic evaluation constitutes one of the key pillars of the HTA process in Europe. Although a methodological convergence has occurred during the last few years, notable differences still remain.

Download Full-text

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

The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry ◽

10.1177/070674370505000305 ◽

2005 ◽

Vol 50 (3) ◽

pp. 159-166 ◽

Cited By ~ 16

Author(s):

Jeffrey S Hoch ◽

Carolyn S Dewa

Keyword(s):

Economic Evaluation ◽

Evaluation Method ◽

Cost Effective ◽

Economic Evaluations ◽

Economic Study ◽

Value Judgment ◽

A Value ◽

Different Types ◽

New Treatment ◽

Evaluation Techniques

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

Download Full-text