A comparative review of pharmacoeconomic guidelines

PHARMACOECONOMIC STUDIES IN WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN COUNTRIES: REPORTING COMPLETENESS

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate the extent of reporting necessary information in published health economic research in World Health Organization Eastern Mediterranean Countries (WHO EMC).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar to identify pharmacoeconomic studies conducted in WHO EMC. The inclusion criteria for the studies were: (i) original studies, (ii) compared pharmaceutical services or drugs, (iii) conducted in WHO EMC, (iv) manuscript published in English. The articles were reviewed by two independent reviewers using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

A total of seventeen studies were included, each of which were published in seventeen different journals. The mean CHEERS checklist score was 16 ± 4. Most studies were published in journals outside WHO EMC (n = 12; 71 percent). Cost-effectiveness (n = 5; 29 percent) and cost-utility analyses (n = 5; 29 percent) were the most frequently used methods of economic evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacoeconomic studies in WHO EMC are limited and sometimes incomplete. Economic evaluation of pharmaceuticals should be encouraged in WHO EMC to ensure the appropriate allocation of healthcare resources.

Comparison of utility scores from the Visual Analog Scale and Health Utilities Index 3 in children following pediatric intensive care unit admission

Indirect and direct health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures are intended to assess the same underlying constructs. There is evidence that the two types of assessments can show important differences. We assessed the agreement between the utilities of direct and indirect HRQoL measurements in children following pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission. We collected Health Utilities Index 3 (HUI-3) and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ratings of children who were urgently admitted to the PICU of a university-affiliated pediatric hospital at ICU admission (baseline) and one month post-ICU admission. The mean (SD) VAS converted standard gamble and HUI-3 utilities were 0.82 (±0.19) and 0.70 (±0.39), respectively, at baseline (n = 51), and 0.81 (±0.15) and 0.58 (±0.39) at one month (n = 36). The VAS utilities were significantly greater than the HUI-3 utilities (p = 0.009). At baseline, the intraclass coefficient (95% confidence interval) was 0.49 (0.25-0.68), representing moderate agreement, and at one month, was 0.18 (-0.87 to 0.45), representing negligible agreement. There were significant differences between indirect and direct measures, and inconsistent agreement between utilities derived from the two measures. These data illustrate the potential impact of HRQoL assessment techniques on economic analyses used to inform health policy decision-making for pediatric critical care.

Conceptual framework for standard economic evaluation of physical activity programs in primary prevention

Economic evaluations of primary prevention physical activity programs have gained importance because of scarce resources in health-care-systems. A concept for economic evaluation should be based on the efficacy of physical activity, the standard methods of economic evaluation and the aims of public health. Previous publications have examined only parts of these components and have not developed a comprehensive conceptual framework; it is the objective of this article to develop such a framework. The derived method should aid decision makers and staff members of intervention programs in reviewing and conducting an economic evaluation. A literature search of articles was done using six electronic databases. Referenced works for standard methods and more comprehensive approaches for evaluation of preventive programs were studied. The newly developed conceptual framework for economic evaluation includes: (1) the type of physical activity program; (2) features of a selected study population; (3) the outcome dimension comprising exercise efficacy, reach, recruitment, response rate, maintenance, compliance and adverse health effects plus the social impact; and (4) the cost dimension consisting of program development costs, program implementation costs including the implementation, recruitment, program, participants' time costs and savings resulting from the health effects of the intervention. Cost-effectiveness also depends on the methodology, such as the chosen perspective, data collection, valuation methods and discounting. If an intervention is not considered cost-effective, it is necessary to check each dimension to find possible failures in order to learn for future interventions. A more detailed economic evaluation is of utmost importance for improved comparability and transferability.

The role of pharmacoeconomics in formulary decision making in different hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVE

To assess the trend of using pharmacoeconomic information by Pharmacy and Therapeutics (P&T) committees when making formulary decisions.

DESIGN

A cross-sectional study conducted in 2007, using structured survey questionnaires which were distributed to members of the P&T committees in 11 different hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

RESULTS

A total of 100 survey questionnaires were sent to head of pharmacy departments of 11 different hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Out of these, 48 questionnaires were completed and returned. Of the total respondents participated in the study, 64.58% were medical doctors and 16.66% were pharmacists and 75% of the respondents said they have applied pharmacoeconomic evaluations in their decision making process. More than 80% of the respondents perceived that they had a fair knowledge of pharmacoeconomics. Approximately 80% of respondents expressed some degree of agreement that pharmacoeconomics should be applied as a decision making tool. The majority of decision-makers (95%) expressed the interest in attending workshops on pharmacoeconomics.

CONCLUSION

The study showed that pharmacoeconomics can play an important role in the P&T committee formulary decisions. However, more education to health care professionals and to hospital administrators should be conducted to facilitate the use of such a tool. Also, hospitals should recruit health care professionals with pharmacoeconomic expertise to manage limited health resources in the best way available.

Nutrition economics - characterising the economic and health impact of nutrition

There is a new merging of health economics and nutrition disciplines to assess the impact of diet on health and disease prevention and to characterise the health and economic aspects of specific changes in nutritional behaviour and nutrition recommendations. A rationale exists for developing the field of nutrition economics which could offer a better understanding of both nutrition, in the context of having a significant influence on health outcomes, and economics, in order to estimate the absolute and relative monetary impact of health measures. For this purpose, an expert meeting assessed questions aimed at clarifying the scope and identifying the key issues that should be taken into consideration in developing nutrition economics as a discipline that could potentially address important questions. We propose a first multidisciplinary outline for understanding the principles and particular characteristics of this emerging field. We summarise here the concepts and the observations of workshop participants and propose a basic setting for nutrition economics and health outcomes research as a novel discipline to support nutrition, health economics and health policy development in an evidence and health-benefit-based manner.

An appraisal of pharmacoeconomic evidence of maintenance therapy for COPD

COPD is projected to be the third-leading cause of death by the year 2020. Pharmacotherapy for COPD is palliative at best, having no impact on slowing the progression of the disease. The introduction of newer therapies such as long-acting forms of bronchodilator and anticholinergic agents, together with the inclusion of inhaled corticosteroids (ICSs) in the recent Global Initiative for COPD therapeutic algorithm, have expanded the pharmacotherapy options for the treatment of COPD. This article provides a methodologic critique of the available pharmacoeconomic evidence on drug therapy for stable COPD in an effort to complement treatment guidelines and to identify any need for future pharmacoeconomic research. Relevant search strategies revealed a total of 28 economic evaluations of which 7 satisfied the study inclusion criteria. The Drummond 10-point checklist was used for the methodological critique of the economic evaluations. Five of seven pharmacoeconomic studies were conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial, and six of seven were cost-effectiveness analyses. Of the bronchodilators, the long-acting anticholinergic agent tiotropium is considered to be cost-effective relative to ipratropium. No conclusive information could be reached for the cost-effectiveness of long-acting beta-agonists. A Markov analysis showed ICSs to be cost-effective for patients with moderate-to-severe COPD relative to standard care. However, assumptions of the model may bias this conclusion, and additional studies are warranted, especially compared to other treatments. The authors suggest that additional pharmacoeconomic studies be conducted to assess the cost-effectiveness of long-acting beta-agonists and ICSs, between classes of bronchodilators, and between various combination therapies.

Quality Assessment of Published Health Economic Analyses from South America

Background:

Health economic analyses have become important to healthcare systems worldwide. No studies have previously examined South America's contribution in this area.

Objective:

To survey the literature with the purpose of reviewing, quantifying, and assessing the quality of published South American health economic analyses.

Methods:

A search of MEDLINE (1990–December 2004), EMBASE (1990–December 2004), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1990–December 2004), Literatura Latino-Americana e do Caribe em Ciências da Saûde (1982–December 2004), and Sistema de Informacion Esencial en Terapéutica y Salud (1980–December 2004) was completed using the key words cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), cost-utility analysis (CUA), cost-minimization analysis (CMA), and cost-benefit analysis (CBA); abbreviations CEA, CUA, CMA, and CBA; and all South American country names. Papers were categorized by type and country by 2 independent reviewers. Quality was assessed using a 12 item checklist, characterizing scores as 4 (good), 3 (acceptable), 2 (poor), 1 (unable to judge), and 0 (unacceptable). To be included in our investigation, studies needed to have simultaneously examined costs and outcomes.

Results:

We retrieved 25 articles; one duplicate article was rejected, leaving 24 (CEA = 15, CBA = 6, CMA = 3; Brazil = 9, Argentina = 5, Colombia = 3, Chile = 2, Ecuador = 2, 1 each from Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela). Variability between raters was less than 0.5 point on overall scores (OS) and less than 1 point on all individual items. Mean OS was 2.6 (SD 1.0, range 1.4–3.8). CBAs scored highest (OS 2.8, SD 0.8), CEAs next (OS 2.7, SD 0.7), and CMAs lowest (OS 2.0, SD 0.5). When scored by type of question, definition of study aim scored highest (OS 3.0, SD 0.8), while ethical issues scored lowest (OS 1.5, SD 0.9). By country, Peru scored highest (mean OS 3.8) and Uruguay had the lowest scores (mean OS 2.2). A nonsignificant time trend was noted for OS (R2 = 0.12; p = 0.104).

Conclusions:

Quality scores of health economic analyses articles published in South America were rated poor to acceptable and lower than previous research from other countries. Thus, efforts are needed to improve the reporting quality of these analyses in South America. Future research should examine the region's level of expertise and educational opportunities for those in the field of health economics.

Estudios de evaluación económica en salud

Clinical journals often publish economic evaluation studies of health technologies and programs. To improve the peer review process and, hence, the quality and validity of published studies, the British Medical Journal (BMJ) established publication guidelines for the publication of economic evaluations aimed at authors, reviewers and editors. The present article analyzes the opportunity of adopting the BMJ's or similar guidelines by Medicina Clínica and the probable effectiveness of this measure. The article concludes that although this initiative would probably improve the review process and the quality of the papers published, it might be worthwhile to review, up-date and adapt the BMJ guidelines to the Spanish context by means of a consensus-forming process. Finally, this article discusses the limitations of the peer review process in improving the quality and validity of economic evaluations and suggests some complementary measures, drawing on lessons and experiences from the field of clinical research.

Quality appraisal of pediatric health economic evaluations

Objectives: This study was undertaken to appraise the quality of published pediatric economic evaluations.

Methods: Two independent reviewers appraised 149 randomly selected pediatric health economic studies. Data were collected from full economic evaluations published between 1980 and 1999. Economic evaluations of interventions, programs, and services aimed at neonates to adolescents were included. The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ) was used for appraisal. The PQAQ is a 57-item instrument with 13 domains scored from 0 to 1 and one descriptive domain, each corresponding to a key aspect of health economic methodology. The primary outcome was the score for each domain. Additional analyses examined the global rating, the distribution of analytic technique, and the association between domain score and analytic technique.

Results: A total of 38 percent of publications were very good to excellent, whereas 43 percent were fair or worse. Although the Discounting, Target Population, Economic Evaluation, Conclusions, and Comparators domains exhibited good quality (0.74 to 0.78), the papers were of poor quality for Conflict of Interest, Incremental Analysis, and Perspective (0.32 to 0.39). Analytic technique was a significant predictor of quality for study design-related domains, with cost-utility analyses demonstrating the highest domain scores.

Conclusions: Domains closely related to the elements of economic evaluation demonstrated medium to high quality. However, domains related to analysis fared poorly and are worthy of further methodological research to improve the use of health economic methods in children.

International variation in resource utilisation and treatment costs for rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic literature review

Recent years have witnessed substantial progress in understanding the cost implications of rheumatoid arthritis (RA). To assess the divergent methodologies and their impact on the resulting cost analyses in RA, we conducted a systematic literature review to summarise the scientific evidence of RA-induced costs. Sixty-five reviews, models or cost analyses on the burden of illness and general costs associated with RA were identified. They covered the US, Canada, Sweden, the UK, The Netherlands, Germany and Finland. Twenty-four cost analyses provided appropriate data about direct and/or indirect costs. Each study was summarised separately. Costs were discounted to 2003 and converted to US dollars. The costs per RA-year ranged from USD 1503 to USD 16,514. However, each study has to be interpreted individually, with consideration given to the study population, indication, age of the study, database used, type of therapy, setting, level of cost differentiation and data derivation. Health technology assessment reports offer sufficient space to adequately describe the composite parts and restrictive elements of different methodological approaches and analyses.

Meta-analysis of basiliximab for immunoprophylaxis in renal transplantation

BACKGROUND

Basiliximab is a high-affinity chimeric monoclonal antibody directed against the alpha-chain of the interleukin (IL)-2 receptor. Individual studies have shown that it is highly effective in preventing acute rejection and causes no measurable incremental toxicity. However, incorporation of basiliximab immunoprophylaxis into routine practice depends upon the demonstration of benefit across treatment regimens and quantitation of the treatment effect.

METHODS

This study employed a meta-analysis to examine the clinical benefit of basiliximab. Parameter estimates were derived from four randomised prospective double-blind studies conducted in 93 renal transplant centres in 18 countries. A total of 1185 adult primary allograft recipients were randomised within the centres to receive either basiliximab 20mg intravenously on days 0 and 4 or placebo, in addition to double or triple immunosuppression consisting of cyclosporin-microemulsion (Neoral((R))The use of tradenames is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement.), corticosteroids, and azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil. Key clinical events included patient and graft survival, graft rejection and complications. Analysis was performed using a variable model; odds ratios and the numbers needed to treat (NNT) to benefit or to harm one patient were calculated for each principal outcome at 6 or 12 months post-transplant.

RESULTS

Basiliximab reduced the relative risk (RR) and absolute risk (AR) of clinical and biopsy-proven acute graft rejection across all treatment regimens. The overall RR of clinical acute graft rejection was decreased by 35% in patients receiving basiliximab. AR was reduced by 15.6% (pooled incidence: 28.8% vs 44.4%, p < 0.0001), and the NNT for efficacy was six. The reduction in RR of biopsy-proven rejection was similar (32%) with an absolute risk reduction (ARR) of 11.7% (pooled incidence: 25.1% vs 36.8%, p < 0.0001) and NNT of nine over 6 months. There was a concomitant reduction in the risk of graft loss which did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.14). The RR of graft loss was reduced by 26% with an AR reduction of 2.3% (pooled incidence: 6.4% vs 8.7%) and an NNT of 42 over 6 months. The risk of death was unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunoprophylaxis with basiliximab produces a significant reduction in the RR and AR of clinical and biopsy-proven acute graft rejection with a trend towards a concomitant reduction in the risk of graft loss. The magnitude of protection provided by basiliximab, the fact that it is observed across treatment regimens and the safety of this therapy are arguments for its routine use in renal transplantation.

An economic model of 2-hour post-dose ciclosporin monitoring in renal transplantation

BACKGROUND

Monitoring of microemulsion ciclosporin (cyclosporine; Neoral) by 2-hour post-dose drug concentrations (C2) is an accurate measure of ciclosporin absorption efficiency and exposure, and appears superior to trough (C0) monitoring for prediction of rejection risk. A predictive decision model was used to determine if this approach also reduces total treatment costs in the first 12 months after renal transplantation.

METHODS

Parameter estimates for key clinical events were derived from the literature and from prospective pharmacokinetic studies comprising 234 adult HLA-non-identical renal graft recipients at seven Canadian centres. Patients were treated with microemulsion ciclosporin (Neoral), corticosteroids and azathioprine or mycophenolate mofetil. Using the perspective of the Canadian healthcare provider, total treatment costs for the C2 versus the C0 strategy were modelled over 12 months, and then remodelled using conservative estimates to extend the timeframe to 5 years. Health resources were valued in 1999 Canadian dollars.

RESULTS

The incidence of acute rejection was estimated to be 25% at 1 year in patients monitored by C0 and 18% in those monitored by C2. Patient survival was considered to be independent of monitoring strategy, and graft loss was predicted to be 1.4% lower in the C2 group. The studies suggested no important differences in comorbidity and the costs of C0 and C2 monitoring and ambulatory-based adverse events were held equivalent. Using these inputs, the average cost per patient for the first year post-transplant was Can dollars 46,857 for C0 monitoring and Can dollars 45,306 for C2 monitoring, rising to Can dollars 146,879 and Can dollars 142,569 after 5 years. The predicted cost for initial hospitalisation was Can dollars 11,280 for C0 and Can dollars 10,806 for C2 monitoring. The cost of maintenance immunosuppressive drug use, graft loss and dialysis was Can dollars 19,098 in the C0 group and Can dollars 18,612 in the C2 group, while acute rejection treatment costs were Can dollars 2169 and Can dollars 1577, respectively. An additional Can dollars 14,310 was consumed by other events, including repeat hospitalisation, for each group. Sensitivity analysis indicated that the most influential parameters affecting savings due to C2 monitoring were a reduction in the duration of initial and follow-up hospitalisations and reduced risks of acute rejection and subsequent graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with traditional trough concentration monitoring, ciclosporin monitoring at 2 hours post-dose produced a predicted saving of Can dollars 1551 during the first year after renal transplant. Although modelling assumptions become more restrictive over time, this projection allows a preliminary assessment of the long-term economic impact of the routine use of C2 monitoring.

The Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE) Project

BACKGROUND

While standard methods for conducting economic evaluations have evolved, little attention has been paid to the conduct of these studies in special populations such as children.

OBJECTIVES

To build a database of pediatric economic evaluations and to examine trends in publication characteristics over a 20-year period.

RESEARCH DESIGN

The database was created through a multisource search strategy, manual review, application of inclusion/exclusion criteria, data extraction, and reliability assessment. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize trends in publication volume, disease category, intervention type, and age group between 1980 and 1999.

RESULTS

From an initial cut of 5600 citations identified from 12 journal databases, 787 were included as full pediatric economic evaluations. Volume of publications increased 7-fold between 1980 to 1984 and 1995 to 1999 from 61 to 440 citations per 5-year period. Most studies were performed in children aged 1 to 12 years, and studies in infants displayed an increasing frequency. The most common disease category was infective/parasitic, comprising 24% of studies. Studies of congenital anomalies and complications of pregnancy were also prominent. Although health prevention studies were the most prevalent, health treatment studies demonstrated an equal frequency in 1995 to 1999. Most studies consisted of malaria control and vaccination strategies for hepatitis B, Haemophilus influenzae type B, measles, and varicella.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of pediatric economic evaluations is steadily increasing with most publications representing health prevention interventions. The Pediatric Economic Database Evaluation (PEDE) Project database will be valuable to health researchers working in methods research and conducting systematic reviews.

The Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire: an instrument for evaluation of the pediatric health economics literature

OBJECTIVES

Currently there is no tool available to adequately appraise the quality of the pediatric health economics literature. A comprehensive pediatric-specific instrument would be valuable in informing allocation decisions related to pediatric interventions and services. The goal of this study was to develop the Pediatric Quality Appraisal Questionnaire (PQAQ).

METHODS

A draft instrument was constructed from published checklists and questionnaires. New questions pertaining to the pediatric population were incorporated. An expert panel reviewed the draft instrument and the proposed scoring scheme for face and content validity. A revised version was pilot tested by three independent appraisers. After addressing discrepancies in scores, a final version was created and subjected to interrater and test-retest reliability assessment.

RESULTS

The 57 items in the final PQAQ were mapped onto 14 domains: economic evaluation, comparators, target population, time horizon, perspective, costs and resource use, outcomes, quality of life, analysis, discounting, incremental analysis, sensitivity analysis, conflict of interest, and conclusions. Among the 57 items, 46 have response options that are scored from 0 to 1. Interrater reliability was 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.81) and test-retest reliability was 0.92 (95% CI 0.71-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

The PQAQ is a comprehensive instrument demonstrating face and content validity and strong interrater and test-retest reliability in the appraisal of pediatric economic evaluations. This tool will be valuable to health economists, methods researchers, and policy decision makers involved in allocation decisions for pediatric health care.

Standardisation of costs: the Dutch Manual for Costing in economic evaluations

The lack of a uniform costing methodology is often considered a weakness of economic evaluations that hinders the interpretation and comparison of studies. Standardisation is therefore an important topic within the methodology of economic evaluations and in national guidelines that formulate the formal requirements for studies to be considered when deciding on the reimbursement of new medical therapies. Recently, the Dutch Manual for Costing: Methods and Standard Costs for Economic Evaluations in Health Care (further referred to as "the manual") has been published, in addition to the Dutch guidelines for pharmacoeconomic research. The objectives of this article are to describe the main content of the manual and to discuss some key issues of the manual in relation to the standardisation of costs. The manual introduces a six-step procedure for costing. These steps concern: the scope of the study;the choice of cost categories;the identification of units;the measurement of resource use;the monetary valuation of units; andthe calculation of unit costs. Each step consists of a number of choices and these together define the approach taken. In addition to a description of the costing process, five key issues regarding the standardisation of costs are distinguished. These are the use of basic principles, methods for measurement and valuation, standard costs (average prices of healthcare services), standard values (values that can be used within unit cost calculations), and the reporting of outcomes. The use of the basic principles, standard values and minimal requirements for reporting outcomes, as defined in the manual, are obligatory in studies that support submissions to acquire reimbursement for new pharmaceuticals. Whether to use standard costs, and the choice of a particular method to measure or value costs, is left mainly to the investigator, depending on the specific study setting. In conclusion, several instruments are available to increase standardisation in costing methodology among studies. These instruments have to be used in such a way that a balance is found between standardisation and the specific setting in which a study is performed. The way in which the Dutch manual tries to reach this balance can serve as an illustration for other countries.

Information barriers to the implementation of economic evaluations in Japan

With increasing cost-containment pressures within healthcare systems worldwide, economic evaluations of medical technologies, particularly pharmaceuticals, are used to aid the allocation of expenditure and resources. Facing similar pressures, Japan will probably also introduce economic evaluation of health technology. However, the structure of the healthcare system in Japan does not lend itself naturally to the collection of the epidemiological and cost data required for economic evaluations in medicine. In addition, there are no formal methodological guidelines in place for these analyses. To overcome these information barriers in Japan, progress may be aided by the adoption of approaches used in other countries for data collection and guideline development.

Economic analysis of basiliximab in renal transplantation

BACKGROUND

Basiliximab is a chimeric monoclonal directed against the alpha-chain of the interleukin-2 receptor. International studies have shown that it is highly effective in preventing acute rejection in patients receiving Neoral, and causes no measurable incremental toxicity, but its economic value remains unknown.

METHODS

This study employed an economic model to examine the potential economic benefit of basiliximab. Parameter estimates were derived from a randomized, prospective, double-blind study conducted in 21 renal transplant centers in seven countries in which 380 adult primary allograft recipients were randomized within center to receive basiliximab (20 mg i.v.) on days 0 and 4 or placebo in addition to dual immunosuppression with Neoral and steroids. Key clinical events included primary hospitalization, immunosuppressive drug use, patient and graft survival, graft rejection, treatment of rejection, dialysis, and repeat hospitalization. Health resources were valued via a comprehensive electronic cost dictionary, based upon a detailed economic evaluation of renal transplantation in Canada. Medication costs were calculated from hospital pharmacy acquisition costs; basiliximab was assessed a zero cost.

RESULTS

The average estimated cost per patient for the first year after transplant was $55,393 (Canadian dollars) for placebo and $50,839 for basiliximab, rising to $141,690 and $130,592, respectively, after 5 years. A principal component of the cost in both groups was accrued during the initial transplant hospitalization ($14,663 for standard therapy and $14,099 for basiliximab). An additional $15,852 and $14,130 was attributable to continued care, graft loss, and dialysis in the two groups, whereas follow-up hospitalization consumed an additional $15,538 for placebo and $13,916 for basiliximab. The mean incremental cost of dialysis was $5,397 for placebo compared with $3,821 for basiliximab, whereas incremental costs of graft loss were $2,548 compared with $2,295 in the two treatment groups. The principal costs associated with repeat admission to the transplant ward and the general ward were marginally higher for placebo ($7,395 vs. $6,300 and $5,986 vs. $4,625). Treatment of acute rejection and maintenance immunosuppressive drug use were associated with only limited savings as a result of basiliximab (savings <$200 each). Sensitivity analysis indicated that the most influential parameters affecting the savings as a result of using basiliximab were a reduction in the duration of initial and repeat hospitalization followed by the reduced risks of acute rejection and graft loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Before accounting for the cost of the therapy itself, basiliximab produces an estimated economic saving of $4,554 during the first year after transplant, of which $3,344 is attributable to the reduced costs of graft dysfunction, including graft loss and dialysis ($1,722) and follow-up hospitalizations ($1,622). When marketed, basiliximab is expected to cost approximately $3,000 per course (two doses of 20 mg), resulting in a net first-year saving of $1,554. Under these circumstances, basiliximab can be considered a dominant therapy in renal transplantation.

Health economic guidelines--similarities, differences and some implications

OBJECTIVE

To classify, summarize, and compare the health economic guidelines (HE) issued in Europe, North America, and Australia to clarify similarities and differences between them.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In a literature review HE guidelines were classified according to whether they were 1) formalized, 2) informal, or 3) guidelines for health economic methods. All the guidelines were summarized in a table format according to 15 important methodological aspects. The aspects were compared both within and between the three groups.

RESULTS

A total of 25 guidelines were identified, seven formalized, eight informal, and 10 guidelines for HE methods. The levels of agreement for methodological aspects within groups were 40% to 100%, 25% to 100% and 30% to 100% for the formalized, informal, and HE guidelines, respectively. The formal guidelines were slightly more homogenous than the other groups. The between-group comparison showed that the guidelines were in agreement for about 75% of methodological aspects. Disagreement between guidelines was found in choice of perspective, resources, and costs that should be included in the analysis, and in methods of evaluating resources used.

CONCLUSION

A harmonization of methodological requirements and recommendations exists both within and between the guideline groups. This review provides information concerning the core of agreements that have been reached. A number of policy implications for various parties, mainly the pharmaceutical industry, were identified.

Health-related quality-of-life measurement in hypertension. A review of randomised controlled drug trials

In hypertension, tolerability of drug treatment is important because individuals may see the use of antihypertensive medications as more troubling than their seemingly symptomless disease. This may result in noncompliance and ineffectual long term treatment. In the past 15 years, new antihypertensive medications have been marketed on the basis of the advantages they offer with regard to adverse effects and the unavoidable impact of such adverse effects on a person's quality of life. When related to health, quality of life refers to the physical, psychological and social dimensions of health that are influenced by a person's experiences, beliefs, expectations and perceptions. To measure this concept, many instruments, either generic or specific, may be used. The purpose of this study is to describe, by way of a critical review of the literature, the instruments that are most often used in the measurement of health-related quality of life (HR-QOL) in people using antihypertensive drug treatments. We carried out a search of the literature published in English in the period January 1966 to July 2000, looking for randomised controlled trials of antihypertensive drugs. Using the Medline database, we included 77 papers in our review. Our main finding suggests that HR-QOL changes associated with antihypertensive treatment are measured with many different instruments. In almost all studies, at least 1 instrument specific to a health dimension was used, whereas not many used a generic instrument only. The most commonly measured HR-QOL dimensions were cognitive function, symptomatic well-being, sexual function, psychological well-being, sleep dysfunction, social participation and general health perception. Since the choice of dimensions to measure depends not only on the disease but also on the drug, this review adds further evidence that a generic instrument as well as a preference measurement should be added to a specific instrument.

Standards for economic and quality of life studies in transplantation

There are unique requirements in conducting and reporting economic and quality of life investigations in medicine as compared with more traditional studies involving clinical outcomes. In addition, there are several unique characteristics of the discipline of transplantation that also bear attention in economic and quality of life studies. To provide guidelines for future research and reporting of future research, a consensus conference of transplant professionals was convened to discuss these issues. Five different areas were addressed: "Conducting an Economic Analysis," "Reporting an Economic Analysis," "Quality of Life Studies in Transplantation," "Ethical and Conflict of Interest Issues Between Sponsors and Investigators," and "Future Directions for Research." A series of recommendations for each of these areas with reference to relevant literature is presented.

Development of WHO guidelines on generalized cost-effectiveness analysis

The growing use of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to evaluate specific interventions is dominated by studies of prospective new interventions compared with current practice. This type of analysis does not explicitly take a sectoral perspective in which the costs and effectiveness of all possible interventions are compared, in order to select the mix that maximizes health for a given set of resource constraints. WHO guidelines on generalized CEA propose the application of CEA to a wide range of interventions to provide general information on the relative costs and health benefits of different interventions in the absence of various highly local decision constraints. This general approach will contribute to judgements on whether interventions are highly cost-effective, highly cost-ineffective, or something in between. Generalized CEAs require the evaluation of a set of interventions with respect to the counterfactual of the null set of the related interventions, i.e. the natural history of disease. Such general perceptions of relative cost-effectiveness, which do not pertain to any specific decision-maker, can be a useful reference point for evaluating the directions for enhancing allocative efficiency in a variety of settings. The proposed framework allows the identification of current allocative inefficiencies as well as opportunities presented by new interventions.

Productivity-cost controversies in cost-effectiveness analysis: review and research agenda

Productivity costs represent true costs to society and should not be ignored in a cost-effectiveness analysis. However, there is dissension among health economists regarding measurement of productivity costs. Certain health economists argue for inclusion of productivity costs in the denominator of the cost-effectiveness ratio, measured in quality-adjusted life-years. Others argue that productivity costs should be included in the numerator of the cost-effectiveness ratio, measured in dollars using the friction-cost method or the human-capital method. This paper reviews the productivity-cost controversies and offers suggestions for future research addressing the debated issues.

The perspective of a pharmacoeconomic study: targeting for audiences

As with any type of research, it is crucial at the outset to consider the concerns and perspectives of the audience to which economic study results will be presented. Because the results of a pharmacoeconomic study should result in decisions that can have great impact on the use of a drug or a service, a concise objective with clearly defined and relevant measurement criteria must be provided. The study must answer the questions of the target audience in an unambiguous, understandable language. A thorough assessment of the costs involved to carry out the research must also take place early on in the study design, in order not to jeopardise the study's progress or perceived value for money. The paper discusses briefly some points to bear in mind at the study design stage regarding tailoring the focus to the target audience.

Quality assessment of pharmacoeconomic abstracts of original research articles in selected journals

OBJECTIVE

To assess and compare the quality of pharmacoeconomic abstracts of cost-minimization analyses, cost-effectiveness analyses, cost-utility analyses, and cost-benefit analyses of original research articles in selected medical, pharmacy, and health economics journals.

METHODS

MEDLINE was used to identify articles in selected medical, pharmacy, and health economics journals using the MeSH word "economic" and text words "cost" and "pharmacoeconomic"; the journal PharmacoEconomics was searched manually. All retrieved abstracts were evaluated. Original, comparative (at least one drug comparator) research articles (1990-1994) reporting both costs and clinical outcomes were included in the quality analysis. Abstract quality was assessed as a percentage by using a checklist with 29 objective criteria. Group consensus produced interrater reliability greater than 0.8.

RESULTS

One thousand two published abstracts labeled with the above key words were identified. Of these, 951 were excluded from quality assessment because they were not original research (18%), were not pharmacoeconomic research (47%), lacked a drug comparator (35%), or did not report a clinical outcome (0.5%). Thus, the quality of 51 (5% of the total) remaining abstracts was assessed. Overall scores were 56% in 1990 and 58% in 1994 (p = 0.094). Medical articles scored highest (61.5%; n = 25), pharmacy articles were next (54.3%; n = 5), and health economics articles were lowest (53.4%; n = 21) (p = 0.091); structured abstracts scored significantly higher (62.5%; n = 20) than unstructured (53.3%; n = 31) (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Abstract quality was generally poor, with no significant change in quality over time. Medical journals scored highest, probably because they use structured abstracts. Guidelines for structured pharmacoeconomic abstracts may assist in improving quality.