Long Term Cost-Effectiveness of a Systolic Blood Pressure Goal of <120 mmHg in Hypertensive Patients Without Diabetes Mellitus

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

INTRODUCTION

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Uncontrolled blood pressure among hypertensive adults with rheumatoid arthritis in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT

Despite the availability and advancement of diagnostic and treatments with demonstrated benefits in minimizing cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, hypertension control rates remain suboptimal. Therefore, this research aimed to determine the prevalence of uncontrolled BP in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients and understand all potential risk factors for uncontrolled BP.We conducted a cross-sectional study on RA patients in 2 rheumatology clinics in 2 public hospitals in Riyadh. Patients' information such as demographics, comorbidities, drug use, and other clinical data were captured through a review of medical records and supplemented by patient interviews. Multivariate logistic regression was utilized for the analysis to identify the significant factors of uncontrolled BP (systolic BP ≥140 mm Hg or diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg).In total, 834 subjects with RA and concomitant BP were involved in this cross-sectional study. The prevalence of uncontrolled BP was found to be 31.65% among all the study population. Multivariate analysis showed that males, subjects above 60 years of age, and smokers had a distinctly higher occurrence of uncontrolled BP. Among the patients with comorbid conditions, those with obesity, hyperlipidemia, diabetes, anemia, cancer, and reflex or gastroesophageal reflux disease also showed a significantly higher risk of uncontrolled BP (P < .05).The rate of uncontrolled BP was found to be alarmingly high in the study population. Age, gender, smoking, diabetes, obesity, hyperlipidemia, cancer, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and osteoporosis are independently linked with lack of BP control.

Reporting Quality of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses Conducted in Saudi Arabia: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacoeconomics and health economics in general is a new field that is still developing and emerging, not only in Saudi Arabia but all over the world. The objective of this study is to collect all published cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) studies conducted based on Saudi settings and to evaluate their reporting quality.

METHODS

We used PRISMA guidelines to search for all English-language CEAs conducted in Saudi Arabia in 3 databases: Medline, Embase, and Scopus. Keywords used in the search were: cost-effectiveness, cost-benefit, cost-utility, economic evaluation, Saudi Arabia. The data extracted were analyzed to assess reporting quality based on Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Guidelines (CHEERS) and the second panel recommendations.

RESULTS

The 3 databases yielded 859 articles after removing duplicates. Only 7 articles included as final results following PRISMA guidelines. These 7 studies were published between 2015 and 2020. The CEA studies varied in their reporting quality; however, there were common missing required items among all of them, such as justifying choosing of a specific model and time horizon and reporting the ethical implications of the studied interventions.

CONCLUSION

Seven published CEA studies were conducted based on Saudi settings as revealed by this review. The included studies reported the more important aspects of CEA studies. However, there were missed reporting items based on the checklists we used to assess CEAs in this review. Although perfect and complete adherence to CHEERS or the second panel guidelines is a high standard, future CEAs should adhere to such standards. Transparency and good reporting are cornerstones in CEAs, and future CEAs should report their methods, findings, and results in a more transparent and efficient way.