1
|
Wouterse B, Santos JV, Hiligsmann M. Future directions for the economics of prevention. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2025:1-4. [PMID: 40272784 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2025.2498665] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/06/2025] [Accepted: 04/23/2025] [Indexed: 04/29/2025]
Affiliation(s)
- Bram Wouterse
- IQ Health, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
| | - João Vasco Santos
- RISE-Health, Department of Community Medicine, Information and Health Decision Sciences (MEDCIDS), Faculty of Medicine, University of Porto, and Public Health Unit, ULS Santo António, Porto, Portugal
| | - Mickaël Hiligsmann
- Department of Health Services Research CAPHRI Care and Public Health Research Institute, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Zechmeister-Koss I, Götz G, Fabian D, Wild C. The role of health economics within health technology assessment: past, present, and future - an Austrian perspective. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2024; 40:e51. [PMID: 39498481 PMCID: PMC11563174 DOI: 10.1017/s0266462324000503] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/21/2023] [Revised: 06/13/2024] [Accepted: 07/15/2024] [Indexed: 11/07/2024]
Abstract
In many countries, the economics domain forms a routine part of health technology assessments (HTA) next to analyzing the comparative effectiveness and safety of a technology. The method applied most often is economic evaluation, such as cost-effectiveness analysis, which is supposed to support the efficient use of resources. In Austria, economic evaluation has played a negligible role in HTA and reimbursement decisions, even though the country faces the same public healthcare sustainability challenges as others. In this commentary, we argue that while health economics will need to play a more active role in HTA-related decision support to deal with those challenges, current approaches in other countries may have to be broadened to fit the Austrian context. We are outlining four arguments to underpin this perspective: First, economic evaluations (in their current form) are of limited benefit for supporting reimbursement decisions of new high-priced technologies. Second, a broader variety of health economic methods is needed to address the scope of technologies. Third, applying health economic methods requires a reflection on their underlying values. Finally, health economics within HTA needs to go beyond microeconomic analysis of interventions. We are suggesting several alternative methods and approaches, encouraging out-of-the-box thinking and experimenting with methods developed in the academic context but rarely applied in routine HTA. Although some of our topics are unique to Austria, others may equally apply to other healthcare systems. With our thoughts, we aim to stimulate discussions for further developing health economics within HTA in Austria and internationally.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Gregor Götz
- Austrian Institute for Health Technology Assessment (AIHTA), Vienna, Austria
| | - Daniel Fabian
- Austrian Institute for Health Technology Assessment (AIHTA), Vienna, Austria
| | - Claudia Wild
- Austrian Institute for Health Technology Assessment (AIHTA), Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Mendoza-Jiménez MJ, van Exel J, Brouwer W. On spillovers in economic evaluations: definition, mapping review and research agenda. THE EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS : HEPAC : HEALTH ECONOMICS IN PREVENTION AND CARE 2024; 25:1239-1260. [PMID: 38261132 PMCID: PMC11377364 DOI: 10.1007/s10198-023-01658-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/05/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024]
Abstract
An important issue in economic evaluations is determining whether all relevant impacts are considered, given the perspective chosen for the analysis. Acknowledging that patients are not isolated individuals has important implications in this context. Increasingly, the term "spillovers" is used to label consequences of health interventions on others. However, a clear definition of spillovers is lacking, and as a result, the scope of the concept remains unclear. In this study, we aim to clarify the concept of spillovers by proposing a definition applicable in health economic evaluations. To illustrate the implications of this definition, we highlight the diversity of potential spillovers through an expanded impact inventory and conduct a mapping review that outlines the evidence base for the different types of spillovers. In the context of economic evaluations of health interventions, we define spillovers as all impacts from an intervention on all parties or entities other than the users of the intervention under evaluation. This definition encompasses a broader range of potential costs and effects, beyond informal caregivers and family members. The expanded impact inventory enables a systematic approach to identifying broader impacts of health interventions. The mapping review shows that the relevance of different types of spillovers is context-specific. Some spillovers are regularly included in economic evaluations, although not always recognised as such, while others are not. A consistent use of the term "spillovers", improved measurement of these costs and effects, and increased transparency in reporting them are still necessary. To that end, we propose a research agenda.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- María J Mendoza-Jiménez
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
- Facultad de Ciencias Sociales y Humanísticas, Escuela Superior Politécnica del Litoral (ESPOL), Guayaquil, Ecuador.
| | - Job van Exel
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Werner Brouwer
- Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management (ESHPM), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
- Erasmus Centre for Health Economics Rotterdam (EsCHER), Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Pokhilenko I, Gutierrez-Colosia MR, Janssen LMM, Evers SMAA, Paulus ATG, Drost RMWA, Campoy-Muñoz P, Simon J, Salvador-Carulla L. Clarifying terminology and definitions in education services for mental health users: A disambiguation study. PLoS One 2024; 19:e0306539. [PMID: 38959274 PMCID: PMC11221696 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306539] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/18/2024] [Indexed: 07/05/2024] Open
Abstract
In the wake of the mental health crisis in children and adolescents, the coordination of education and mental health services has become a global priority. However, differing terminologies and classifications across sectors, hinder effective comparison. The classification in education focuses mainly on outputs like qualifications or throughputs like teaching programs. This proof-of-concept study tested the applicability of a standard classification of health services, the Description and Evaluation of Services and DirectoriEs (DESDE), to evaluate education services for mental health users in the context of Spain and The Netherlands. It was conducted alongside the PECUNIA project, that sought to develop methods for the assessment of mental health costs and outcomes in different sectors. The study followed an ontoterminology approach involving: 1) identification of services from a predefined list of 46 resource-use items, 2) disambiguation of identified services with the DESDE, and classifying them as accurate, ambiguous, vague or confuse; and 3) external validation by an expert panel. The analysis was conducted at the level of type of resource, target population and care provision. From the initial list, only ten of the resources could be categorized as services using DESDE, and not activities, interventions or professionals. Only four of them (8,65%) were accurate across all disambiguation categories. Experts were unaware of terminology problems in classification of service provision in the education sector. Classifications and glossaries can clarify service naming, description and costing allowing comparative effectiveness analysis and facilitating cross-sectoral planning. This should be grounded in common methodologies, tools, and units of analysis.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irina Pokhilenko
- Institute of Applied Health Research, Center for Economics of Obesity, Health Economics Unit, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, The United Kingdom
| | | | - Luca M. M. Janssen
- Faculty of Health, Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Silvia M. A. A. Evers
- Faculty of Health, Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Trimbos Institute Centre of Economic Evaluation & Machine Learning, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Agnes T. G. Paulus
- Faculty of Health, Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben M. W. A. Drost
- Faculty of Health, Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | - Luis Salvador-Carulla
- Health Research Institute, Faculty of Health, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia
- Health Care Information Systems (CTS553), University of Cadiz, Cadiz, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Berger M, Mayer S, Simon J. A novel set of Austrian reference unit costs for comprehensive societal perspectives consistent with latest European costing methods for economic evaluations. Wien Klin Wochenschr 2024; 136:1-12. [PMID: 36564501 PMCID: PMC9786525 DOI: 10.1007/s00508-022-02128-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2022] [Accepted: 11/15/2022] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Decision making in public health often happens against the background of scarce resources. The systematic use of economic evaluations can be a main enabler in the alignment of public health goals with budgetary constraints. However, the lack of standardized methodology in terms of costing method and perspective are a critical barrier to the implementation of economic evaluations and the international comparability of results. We present a novel set of 22 reference unit costs (RUCs) optimized for cross-sectoral economic evaluations in Austria suitable for international comparability calculated using the standardized PECUNIA RUC Template. The common framework for costing and reporting, as well as the easy availability of the RUCs will reduce the burden on researchers and policy makers in future economic evaluations. The higher quality, accuracy, transparency and availability of economic evidence for policy design will help to improve the efficiency of public health-relevant healthcare decisions and make it easier for policy makers to bring funding arrangements and decision making across multiple sectors in line with Health-in-All-Policies goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Michael Berger
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Susanne Mayer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, OX3 7JX, Oxford, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Fischer C, Bednarz D, Simon J. Methodological challenges and potential solutions for economic evaluations of palliative and end-of-life care: A systematic review. Palliat Med 2024; 38:85-99. [PMID: 38142280 PMCID: PMC10798028 DOI: 10.1177/02692163231214124] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Given the increasing demand for palliative and end-of-life care, along with the introduction of costly new treatments, there is a pressing need for robust evidence on value. However, comprehensive guidance is missing on methods for conducting economic evaluations in this field. AIM To identify and summarise existing information on methodological challenges and potential solutions/recommendations for economic evaluations of palliative and end-of-life care. DESIGN We conducted a systematic review of publications on methodological considerations for economic evaluations of adult palliative and end-of-life care as per our PROSPERO protocol CRD42020148160. Following initial searches, we conducted a two-stage screening process and quality appraisal. Information was thematically synthesised, coded, categorised into common themes and aligned with the items specified in the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards statement. DATA SOURCES The databases Medline, Embase, HTADatabase, NHSEED and grey literature were searched between 1 January 1999 and 5 June 2023. RESULTS Out of the initial 6502 studies, 81 were deemed eligible. Identified challenges could be grouped into nine themes: ambiguous and inaccurate patient identification, restricted generalisability due to poor geographic transferability of evidence, narrow costing perspective applied, difficulties defining comparators, consequences of applied time horizon, ambiguity in the selection of outcomes, challenged outcome measurement, non-standardised measurement and valuation of costs as well as challenges regarding a reliable preference-based outcome valuation. CONCLUSION Our review offers a comprehensive context-specific overview of methodological considerations for economic evaluations of palliative and end-of-life care. It also identifies the main knowledge gaps to help prioritise future methodological research specifically for this field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Fischer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Damian Bednarz
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Ludwig Boltzmann Institute Applied Diagnostics, Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Zechmeister-Koss I, Strohmaier C, Hölzle L, Bauer A, Goodyear M, Christiansen H, Paul JL. Economic Evaluation of Family-Focused Programs When Parents Have a Mental Health Problem: Methodological Considerations. VALUE IN HEALTH : THE JOURNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR PHARMACOECONOMICS AND OUTCOMES RESEARCH 2023; 26:704-711. [PMID: 36503037 DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.11.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/02/2022] [Revised: 11/18/2022] [Accepted: 11/27/2022] [Indexed: 05/03/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The nature of adverse effects of parental mental health problems and of the interventions to address them may require specific designs of economic evaluation studies. Nevertheless, methodological guidance is lacking. We aim to understand the broad spectrum of adverse effects from parental mental health problems in children and the economic consequences on an individual and societal level to navigate the design of economic evaluations in this field. METHODS We conducted a systematic literature search of empirical studies on children's adverse effects from parental mental illness. We clustered types of impact, identified individual and public cost consequences, and illustrated the results in an impact inventory. RESULTS We found a wide variety of short- and long-term (mental) health impacts, impacts on social functioning and socioeconomic implications for the children individually, and adverse effects on the societal level. Consequently, public costs can occur in various public sectors (eg, healthcare, education), and individuals may have to pay costs privately. CONCLUSIONS Existing evaluations in this field mostly follow standard methodological approaches (eg, cost-utility analysis using quality-adjusted life-years) and apply a short-time horizon. Our findings suggest applying a long-term time horizon (at least up to early adulthood), considering cost-consequence analysis and alternatives to health-related quality of life and quality-adjusted life-years as outcome measures, and capturing the full range of possible public and private costs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Laura Hölzle
- Village Research Group, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Annette Bauer
- London School of Economics, Care Policy and Evaluation Centre (CPEC), London, England, UK
| | - Melinda Goodyear
- Monash University Australia, School of Rural Health, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | | | - Jean L Paul
- Village Research Group, Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pokhilenko I, Janssen LMM, Paulus ATG, Drost RMWA, Hollingworth W, Thorn JC, Noble S, Simon J, Fischer C, Mayer S, Salvador-Carulla L, Konnopka A, Hakkaart van Roijen L, Brodszky V, Park AL, Evers SMAA. Development of an Instrument for the Assessment of Health-Related Multi-sectoral Resource Use in Europe: The PECUNIA RUM. APPLIED HEALTH ECONOMICS AND HEALTH POLICY 2023; 21:155-166. [PMID: 36622541 PMCID: PMC9931843 DOI: 10.1007/s40258-022-00780-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/27/2022] [Indexed: 06/17/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Measuring objective resource-use quantities is important for generating valid cost estimates in economic evaluations. In the absence of acknowledged guidelines, measurement methods are often chosen based on practicality rather than methodological evidence. Furthermore, few resource-use measurement (RUM) instruments focus on the measurement of resource use in multiple societal sectors and their development process is rarely described. Thorn and colleagues proposed a stepwise approach to the development of RUM instruments, which has been used for developing cost questionnaires for specific trials. However, it remains unclear how this approach can be translated into practice and whether it is applicable to the development of generic self-reported RUM instruments and instruments measuring resource use in multiple sectors. This study provides a detailed description of the practical application of this stepwise approach to the development of a multi-sectoral RUM instrument developed within the ProgrammE in Costing, resource use measurement and outcome valuation for Use in multi-sectoral National and International health economic evaluAtions (PECUNIA) project. METHODS For the development of the PECUNIA RUM, the methodological approach was based on best practice guidelines. The process included six steps, including the definition of the instrument attributes, identification of cost-driving elements in each sector, review of methodological literature and development of a harmonized cross-sectorial approach, development of questionnaire modules and their subsequent harmonization. RESULTS The selected development approach was, overall, applicable to the development of the PECUNIA RUM. However, due to the complexity of the development of a multi-sectoral RUM instrument, additional steps such as establishing a uniform methodological basis, harmonization of questionnaire modules and involvement of a broader range of stakeholders (healthcare professionals, sector-specific experts, health economists) were needed. CONCLUSION This is the first study that transparently describes the development process of a generic multi-sectoral RUM instrument in health economics and provides insights into the methodological aspects and overall validity of its development process.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irina Pokhilenko
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
- Health Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
| | - Luca M M Janssen
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Aggie T G Paulus
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- School of Health Professions Education (SHE), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben M W A Drost
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - William Hollingworth
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Joanna C Thorn
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Sian Noble
- Department of Population Health Sciences, Bristol Medical School, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK
| | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Claudia Fischer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Susanne Mayer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Luis Salvador-Carulla
- Mental Health Policy Unit, Faculty of Health, Health Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia
- School of Public Health, Menzies Centre for Health Policy, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Alexander Konnopka
- Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Leona Hakkaart van Roijen
- Erasmus School of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University of Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Valentin Brodszky
- Department of Health Policy, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
| | - A-La Park
- Department of Health Policy, Care Policy and Evaluation Centre, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - Silvia M A A Evers
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Trimbos Institute National Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Pokhilenko I, Kast T, Janssen LMM, Evers SMAA, Paulus ATG, Simon J, Mayer S, Berger M, Konnopka A, Muntendorf L, Brodszky V, García-Pérez L, Park A, Salvador-Carulla L, Drost RMWA. International comparability of reference unit costs of education services: when harmonizing methodology is not enough (PECUNIA project). Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 2023; 23:135-141. [PMID: 36472303 DOI: 10.1080/14737167.2023.2152331] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Health problems can lead to costs in the education sector. However, these costs are rarely incorporated in health economic evaluations due to the lack of reference unit costs (RUCs), cost per unit of service, of education services and of validated methods to obtain them. In this study, a standardized unit cost calculation tool developed in the PECUNIA project, the PECUNIA RUC Template for services, was applied to calculate the RUCs of selected education services in five European countries. METHODS The RUCs of special education services and of educational therapy were calculated using the information collected via an exploratory gray literature search and contact with service providers. RESULTS The RUCs of special education services ranged from €55 to €189 per school day. The RUCs of educational therapy ranged from €6 to €25 per contact and from €5 to €35 per day. Variation was observed in the type of input data and measurement unit, among other. DISCUSSION The tool helped reduce variability in the RUCs related to costing methodology and gain insights into other aspects that contribute to the variability (e.g. data availability). Further research and efforts to generate high quality input data are required to reduce the variability of the RUCs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- I Pokhilenko
- Centre for Economics of Obesity, Health Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Dental and Medical Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, The United Kingdom
| | - T Kast
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - L M M Janssen
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - S M A A Evers
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,Centre of Economic Evaluation & Machine Learning, Trimbos Institute, National Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A T G Paulus
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.,School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - J Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Centre for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.,Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, UK
| | - S Mayer
- Department of Health Economics, Centre for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - M Berger
- Department of Health Economics, Centre for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - A Konnopka
- Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - L Muntendorf
- Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - V Brodszky
- Department of Health Economics, Corvinus University of Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
| | - L García-Pérez
- Servicio de Evaluación, Servicio Canario de la Salud (SESCS), Santa Cruz de Tenerife, Spain
| | - A Park
- Care Policy and Evaluation Centre, Department of Health Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK
| | - L Salvador-Carulla
- Mental Health Policy Unit, Health Research Institute, University of Canberra, Canberra, Australia
| | - R M W A Drost
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences (FHML), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Fischer C, Mayer S, Perić N, Simon J. Harmonization issues in unit costing of service use for multi-country, multi-sectoral health economic evaluations: a scoping review. HEALTH ECONOMICS REVIEW 2022; 12:42. [PMID: 35920934 PMCID: PMC9347135 DOI: 10.1186/s13561-022-00390-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/22/2022] [Accepted: 07/26/2022] [Indexed: 06/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Valuation is a critical part of the costing process in health economic evaluations. However, an overview of specific issues relevant to the European context on harmonizing methodological requirements for the valuation of costs to be used in health economic evaluation is lacking. We aimed to inform the development of an international, harmonized and multi-sectoral costing framework, as sought in the European PECUNIA (ProgrammE in Costing, resource use measurement and outcome valuation for Use in multi-sectoral National and International health economic evaluAtions) project. METHODS We conducted a scoping review (information extraction 2008-2021) to a) to demonstrate the degree of heterogeneity that currently exists in the literature regarding central terminology, b) to generate an overview of the most relevant areas for harmonization in multi-sectoral and multi-national costing processes for health economic evaluations, and c) to provide insights into country level variation regarding economic evaluation guidance. A complex search strategy was applied covering key publications on costing methods, glossaries, and international costing recommendations augmented by a targeted author and reference search as well as snowballing. Six European countries served as case studies to describe country-specific harmonization issues. Identified information was qualitatively synthesized and cross-checked using a newly developed, pilot-tested data extraction form. RESULTS Costing methods for services were found to be heterogeneous between sectors and country guidelines and may, in practice, be often driven by data availability and reimbursement systems in place. The lack of detailed guidance regarding specific costing methods, recommended data sources, double-counting of costs between sectors, adjustment of unit costs for inflation, transparent handling of overhead costs as well as the unavailability of standardized unit costing estimates in most countries were identified as main drivers of country specific differences in costing methods with a major impact on valuation and cost-effectiveness evidence. CONCLUSION This review provides a basic summary of existing costing practices for evaluative purposes across sectors and countries and highlights several common methodological factors influencing divergence in cost valuation methods that would need to be systematically incorporated and addressed in future costing practices to achieve more comparable, harmonized health economic evaluation evidence.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Fischer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Susanne Mayer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria.
| | - Nataša Perić
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria
| | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Kinderspitalgasse 15/1, 1090, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Warneford Hospital, Oxford, OX3 7JX, UK
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Xiu J, Zhang Z, Fan Y, Zheng J. Does Giving and Receiving Helping Behavior Fit Matter? The Role of Neighboring Behavior Fit in Working Residents' Mental Health. Front Public Health 2022; 10:863327. [PMID: 35812503 PMCID: PMC9263361 DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.863327] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2022] [Accepted: 05/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Ecological systems theory suggests that for individuals, the three domains of community, family, and work are connected and transfer resources among each other. In the community, residents receive and give helping behavior from and to their neighbors. Neighboring behavior underlies interactions among residents in the community, thereby influencing the work and family domains. Building on ecological systems theory, the authors propose that the compatibility of receiving and giving helping behavior among working residents is related to their mental health. Additionally, the authors propose that this congruence effect functions through work-family interference and meaning in life. Using a two-stage field questionnaire survey, this study collected data from 220 full-time Chinese working residents. Using polynomial regression and response surface analysis, receiving-giving neighboring behavior fit was found to be positively associated with mental health. Furthermore, receiving-giving neighboring behavior fit enhances mental health by decreasing work-family interference and promoting meaning in life. When giving and receiving neighboring behavior are imbalanced, working residents have higher levels of mental health when they received more neighboring behavior than they gave, in comparison to the condition when they gave more neighboring behavior than they received. Work-family interference represents inter-role conflict in which pressures from the family and work domains are mutually incompatible. Including both work to family interference and family to work interference, work-family interferences reflect the stress that working residents experience in their family and work domains. By exploring the mediating role of work-family interference, this study shows how the spillover of the benefits of neighboring behavior into the family and work domains enhances working residents' mental health. This study highlights the importance of balancing receiving and giving neighboring behavior for maintaining mental health, thus contributing both theoretically and practically to ecological systems theory.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jing Xiu
- School of Applied Economics, University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Zhenduo Zhang
- School of Economics and Management, Dalian University of Technology, Dalian, China
- *Correspondence: Zhenduo Zhang
| | - Youqing Fan
- School of Business, Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Junwei Zheng
- Faculty of Civil Engineering and Mechanics, Kunming University of Science and Technology, Kunming, China
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Fischer C, Mayer S, Perić N, Simon J. Establishing a comprehensive list of mental health-related services and resource use items in Austria: A national-level, cross-sectoral country report for the PECUNIA project. PLoS One 2022; 17:e0262091. [PMID: 35061766 PMCID: PMC8782519 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0262091] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/16/2021] [Accepted: 12/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/19/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND A comprehensive, comparable assessment of the economic disease burden and the value of relevant care forms a major challenge in the case of mental diseases. This study aimed to inform the development of a resource use measurement (RUM) instrument and harmonized reference unit costs valid for multi-sectoral and multi-national cost assessments for mental health diseases as part of the European PECUNIA project. METHODS An iterative, multi-methods approach was applied. Systematic literature reviews appended with national grey literature searches in six European countries were conducted to generate preliminary, literature-based, international, mental health-related service and resource use lists for all investigated sectors in 2018. As part of a multi-national expert survey, these lists were reviewed by 18 Austrian sector-specific experts regarding the clarity, relevance, comprehensiveness and availability in the Austrian context. RESULTS Out of 295 items included in the preliminary, international, sector-specific lists (health and social care-201 items, criminal justice-35 items, education-39 items; patient, family and informal care-20 items), a total of 261 items and descriptions (88%) were considered clear by all experts. 42 items (14%) were considered not existing in Austria, and 111 items (38%) were prioritized regarding their relevance in the national context. Thirteen additional items (4%) were suggested to be added to accommodate for Austria-specific features of the individual sectors. Major typological difficulties based on item names were observed. CONCLUSIONS The identified country-specific variations and general typological bias and their potential contributions to service and resource use cost variations across countries and sectors call for further systematic investigation. Next, PECUNIA will develop internationally harmonized and comparable definitions of the listed items and their units of analysis based on a new conceptual multi-sectoral costing framework. The developed lists will require consolidation and further prioritization for the development of a patient-reported RUM instrument and consequent reference unit cost valuation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Claudia Fischer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Susanne Mayer
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Nataša Perić
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Judit Simon
- Department of Health Economics, Center for Public Health, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
- Department of Psychiatry, Warneford Hospital, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Pokhilenko I, Janssen LMM, Evers SMAA, Drost RMWA, Schnitzler L, Paulus ATG. Do Costs in the Education Sector Matter? A Systematic Literature Review of the Economic Impact of Psychosocial Problems on the Education Sector. PHARMACOECONOMICS 2021; 39:889-900. [PMID: 34121169 PMCID: PMC8298334 DOI: 10.1007/s40273-021-01049-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 05/28/2021] [Indexed: 06/12/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Psychosocial (e.g., anxiety or behavior) problems lead to costs not only in the healthcare sector but also in education and other sectors. As psychosocial problems develop during the critical period of establishing educational trajectories, education costs are particularly relevant in the context of psychosocial problems among children and adolescents. OBJECTIVES This study aimed to gain insights into the methods used for the inclusion of education costs in health economics studies and into the proportion of the education costs in relation to the total costs associated with a condition or an intervention. METHODS We systematically searched the PubMed, Embase, SSCI, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ERIC, and Econlit databases in August 2019 for economic evaluations of mental health, psychosocial and educational interventions, and cost-of-illness studies of mental, behavioral, and neurodevelopmental disorders conducted from a societal perspective in populations of children and adolescents. An additional search was conducted in February 2021 to update the review. RESULTS In total, 49 articles were included in the analysis. The most common cost items were special education, school absenteeism, and various educational professionals (educational psychologist). A variety of methods were employed for the identification, measurement, and/or valuation of education costs. The proportion of education costs to the total costs of condition/intervention ranged from 0 to 67%, with the mean being 18.5%. DISCUSSION Since education costs can constitute a significant proportion of the total costs of an intervention or condition, including them in health economics studies might be important in informing optimal resource allocation decisions. Although various methods are available for including education costs in health economics studies, further research is needed to develop evidence-based methods for producing comparable estimates.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Irina Pokhilenko
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
| | - Luca M M Janssen
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Silvia M A A Evers
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Centre for Economic Evaluation and Machine Learning, Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ruben M W A Drost
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | - Lena Schnitzler
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Health Economics Unit, Institute of Applied Health Research, College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Aggie T G Paulus
- Department of Health Services Research, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD, Maastricht, The Netherlands
- Faculty of Health Medicine and Life Sciences, School of Health Professions Education, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Romero-Lopez-Alberca C, Alonso-Trujillo F, Almenara-Abellan JL, Salinas-Perez JA, Gutierrez-Colosia MR, Gonzalez-Caballero JL, Pinzon Pulido S, Salvador-Carulla L. A Semiautomated Classification System for Producing Service Directories in Social and Health Care (DESDE-AND): Maturity Assessment Study. J Med Internet Res 2021; 23:e24930. [PMID: 33720035 PMCID: PMC8074989 DOI: 10.2196/24930] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/10/2020] [Revised: 11/19/2020] [Accepted: 12/17/2020] [Indexed: 01/16/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND DESDE-LTC (Description and Evaluation of Services and DirectoriEs for Long-Term Care) is an international classification system that allows standardized coding and comparisons between different territories and care sectors, such as health and social care, in defined geographic areas. We adapted DESDE-LTC into a computer tool (DESDE-AND) for compiling a directory of care services in Andalucia, Spain. OBJECTIVE The aim of this study was to evaluate the maturity of DESDE-AND. A secondary objective of this study is to show the practicality of a new combined set of standard evaluation tools for measuring the maturity of health technology products. METHODS A system for semiautomated coding of service provision has been co-designed. A panel of 23 domain experts and a group of 68 end users participated in its maturity assessment that included its technology readiness level (TRL), usability, validity, adoption (Adoption Impact Ladder [AIL]), and overall degree of maturity [implementation maturity model [IMM]). We piloted the prototype in an urban environment (Seville, Spain). RESULTS The prototype was demonstrated in an operational environment (TRL 7). Sixty-eight different care services were coded, generating fact sheets for each service and its geolocation map. The observed agreement was 90%, with moderate reliability. The tool was partially adopted by the regional government of Andalucia (Spain), reaching a level 5 in adoption (AIL) and a level 4 in maturity (IMM) and is ready for full implementation. CONCLUSIONS DESDE-AND is a usable and manageable system for coding and compiling service directories and it can be used as a core module of decision support systems to guide planning in complex cross-sectoral areas such as combined social and health care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cristina Romero-Lopez-Alberca
- Department of Psychology, Universidad de Cádiz, Cádiz, Spain
- Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Salud Mental (CIBERSAM), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
| | - Federico Alonso-Trujillo
- Agencia de Servicios Sociales y Dependencia de Andalucía, Junta de Andalucía, Sevilla, Spain
- Health Information Systems Group (SICA-CTS-553), Universidad de Cádiz, Cádiz, Spain
| | - Jose Luis Almenara-Abellan
- Health Information Systems Group (SICA-CTS-553), Universidad de Cádiz, Cádiz, Spain
- Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Servicio Andaluz de Salud, Córdoba, Spain
| | - Jose A Salinas-Perez
- Department of Quantitative Methods, Universidad Loyola Andalucía, Sevilla, Spain
- Centre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, ANU College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| | | | | | - Sandra Pinzon Pulido
- Escuela Andaluza de Salud Pública, Gobierno Regional de la Junta de Andalucía, Granada, Spain
| | - Luis Salvador-Carulla
- Centre for Mental Health Research, Research School of Population Health, ANU College of Health and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia
| |
Collapse
|