Search

IntroductionStudies evaluating the cost-effectiveness of screening for Hepatitis B Virus (HBV) and Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) are generally heterogeneous in terms of risk groups, settings, screening intervention, outcomes and the economic modelling framework. It is therefore difficult to compare cost-effectiveness results between studies. This systematic review aims to summarise and critically assess existing economic models for HBV and HCV in order to identify the main methodological differences in modelling approaches.MethodsA structured search strategy was developed and a systematic review carried out. A critical assessment of the decision-analytic models was carried out according to the guidelines and framework developed for assessment of decision-analytic models in Health Technology Assessment of health care interventions.ResultsThe overall approach to analysing the cost-effectiveness of screening strategies was found to be broadly consistent for HBV and HCV. However, modelling parameters and related structure differed between models, producing different results. More recent publications performed better against a performance matrix, evaluating model components and methodology.ConclusionWhen assessing screening strategies for HBV and HCV infection, the focus should be on more recent studies, which applied the latest treatment regimes, test methods and had better and more complete data on which to base their models. In addition to parameter selection and associated assumptions, careful consideration of dynamic versus static modelling is recommended. Future research may want to focus on these methodological issues. In addition, the ability to evaluate screening strategies for multiple infectious diseases, (HCV and HIV at the same time) might prove important for decision makers.

Introduction: With the European Union Regulation on health technology assessment (HTA) approaching, there is concern about how to accommodate the large number of expected population, intervention, comparator, outcome(s), and study type (PICOS) questions and their uncertainty. Navigating uncertainty will prove essential to anticipate evidence requirements. This abstract presents preliminary results of the development of a metric that assesses uncertainty surrounding PICOS questions to eventually guide planning of evidence synthesis for joint clinical assessment (JCA) submission. Methods: The metric will consist of pillars representing overarching themes of uncertainty. Each pillar will contain several elements influencing uncertainty for proposed PICOS questions. This study was conducted in two phases. In phase one, targeted literature searches of peer-reviewed and gray literature were conducted to identify the overarching metric pillars. These pillars were then validated by expert opinion. Similar research methods were used in phase two to inform the content of each of the pillars. Here we present the findings for phase one. Results: The targeted literature review in phase one resulted in multiple candidate elements for the uncertainty pillars. Elements were selected based on expert opinion, resulting in five main pillars. These pillars were considered most valuable for the determination of uncertainty surrounding individual PICOS questions and were considered crucial to HTA acceptance. Phase one resulted in the following pillars: (i) indication and subpopulations; (ii) type of intervention and comparators; (iii) societal and patient unmet need; (iv) type and quality of evidence source informing evidence synthesis; and (v) methodology of evidence synthesis. Conclusions: This study lays the foundation for a metric to assess the uncertainty surrounding proposed PICOS questions for JCAs. The metric identifies existing uncertainties for PICOS questions, assesses potential issues for HTA acceptance, and guides possible evidence synthesis planning. A clear framework for anticipating uncertainty will prove essential in managing resources and expectations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The prevalence of obesity is rising in Scotland and globally. Overall, obesity is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and reduced health-related quality of life. Studies suggest that "healthy obesity" (obesity without metabolic comorbidity) may not be associated with morbidity or mortality. Its impact on health-related quality of life is unknown. Methods We extracted data from the Scottish Health Survey on self-reported health-related quality of life, body mass index (BMI), demographic information and comorbidity. SF-12 responses were converted into an overall health utility score. Linear regression analyses were used to explore the association between BMI and health utility, stratified by the presence or absence of metabolic comorbidity (diabetes, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia or cardiovascular disease), and adjusted for potential confounders (age, sex and deprivation quintile). Results Of the 5,608 individuals, 3,744 (66.8%) were either overweight or obese and 921 (16.4%) had metabolic comorbidity. There was an inverted U-shaped relationship whereby health utility was highest among overweight individuals and fell with increasing BMI. There was a significant interaction with metabolic comorbidity (p = 0.007). Individuals with metabolic comorbidty had lower utility scores and a steeper decline in utility with increasing BMI (morbidly obese, adjusted coefficient: -0.064, 95% CI -0.115, -0.012, p = 0.015 for metabolic comorbidity versus -0.042, 95% CI -0.067, -0.018, p = 0.001 for no metabolic comorbidity). Conclusions The adverse impact of obesity on health-related quality of life is greater among individuals with metabolic comorbidity. However, increased BMI is associated with reduced health-related quality of life even in the absence of metabolic comorbidity, casting doubt on the notion of "healthy obesity".

Abstract Background Recent studies have suggested that walking interventions may be effective (at least in the short term) at increasing physical activity amongst those people who are the most inactive. This is a leading objective of contemporary public health policy in the UK and worldwide. However, before committing money from limited budgets to implement walking interventions more widely in the community, policymakers will want to know whether similar impacts can be expected and whether any changes will be required to the process to ensure uptake and success. This paper utilises the findings from a recent community-based pedometer study (Walking for Wellbeing in the West - WWW) undertaken in Glasgow, Scotland to address issues of feasibility. Methods An economic analysis of the WWW study assessed the costs of the interventions (minimal and maximal) and combined these with the effects to present incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (cost/person achieving the target of an additional 15,000 steps/week). A qualitative evaluation, involving focus group discussions with WWW participants and short interviews with members of the WWW research team, explored perceived benefits and barriers associated with walking, as well as the successful aspects and challenges associated with the interventions. Results The incremental cost effectiveness associated with the interventions was estimated as £92 and £591 per person achieving the target for the minimal and maximal interventions respectively. The qualitative evaluation gave insight into the process by which the results were achieved, and identified several barriers and facilitators that would need to be addressed before implementing the interventions in the wider community, in order to ensure their effective transfer. These included assessing the impact of the relationship between researchers and participants on the results, and the motivational importance of monitoring and assessing performance. Conclusions The results suggest that pedometer based walking interventions may be considered cost-effective and suitable for implementation within the wider community. However, several research gaps remain, including the importance and impact of the researcher/participant relationship, the impact of assessment on motivation and effectiveness, and the longer term impact on physical and mental health, resource utilisation and quality of life. Trial registration Current Control Trials Ltd ISRCTN88907382

Abstract Background Scotland has a policy aimed at increasing physical activity levels in the population, but evidence on how to achieve this is still developing. Studies that focus on encouraging real world participants to start physical activity in their settings are needed. The Walking for Well-being in the West study was designed to assess the effectiveness of a pedometer-based walking programme in combination with physical activity consultation. The study was multi-disciplinary and based in the community. Walking for Well-being in the West investigated whether Scottish men and women, who were not achieving the current physical activity recommendation, increased and maintained walking behaviour over a 12 month period. This paper outlines the rationale and design of this innovative and pragmatic study. Methods Participants were randomised into two groups: Group 1: Intervention (pedometer-based walking programme combined with a series of physical activity consultations); Group 2: Waiting list control for 12 weeks (followed by minimal pedometer-based intervention). Physical activity (primary outcome) was measured using pedometer step counts (7 day) and the International Physical Activity Questionnaire (long version). Psychological processes were measured using questionnaires relating to the Transtheoretical Model of Behaviour Change, mood (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule) and quality of life (Euroqol EQ-5D instrument). Physiological measures included anthropometric and metabolic outcomes. Environmental influences were assessed subjectively (Neighbourhood Quality of Life Survey) and objectively (neighbourhood audit tool and GIS mapping). The qualitative evaluation employed observation, semi-structured interviews and focus groups. A supplementary study undertook an economic evaluation. Discussion Data analysis is on-going. Walking for Well-being in the West will demonstrate if a pedometer based walking programme, in combination with physical activity consultation results in a sustainable increase in walking behaviour in this sample of Scottish adults over a 12 month period. The study will examine the complex relationships between behavioural change, health consequences and the role of the environment, in conjunction with the cost effectiveness of this approach and a detailed insight into the participants' experiences of the intervention. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN88907382

The Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) developed—in a consultation process with an international expert panel—the efficiency frontier (EF) approach to satisfy a range of legal requirements for economic evaluation in Germany's statutory health insurance system. The EF approach is distinctly different from other health economic approaches. Here, we evaluate established tools for assessing and communicating parameter uncertainty in terms of their applicability to the EF approach. Among these are tools that perform the following: (i) graphically display overall uncertainty within the IQWiG EF (scatter plots, confidence bands, and contour plots) and (ii) communicate the uncertainty around the reimbursable price. We found that, within the EF approach, most established plots were not always easy to interpret. Hence, we propose the use of price reimbursement acceptability curves—a modification of the well-known cost-effectiveness acceptability curves. Furthermore, it emerges that the net monetary benefit allows an intuitive interpretation of parameter uncertainty within the EF approach. This research closes a gap for handling uncertainty in the economic evaluation approach of the IQWiG methods when using the EF. However, the precise consequences of uncertainty when determining prices are yet to be defined. © 2014 The Authors. Health Economics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

UK management costs for COPD, estimated at £1.9 billion/year, are rising. In the FULFIL (Lung Function and Quality of Life Assessment in Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease with Closed Triple Therapy) study, single-inhaler triple therapy with fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (100/62.5/25 µg) improved clinical outcomes versus budesonide/formoterol (400/12 µg) in patients with symptomatic COPD at risk of exacerbations. We assessed the cost-effectiveness of fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus budesonide/formoterol for treating COPD from a UK National Health Service perspective. A model was developed combining a trial-based and Markov component and populated with baseline and treatment effect data from FULFIL, together with UK healthcare resource costs and disease-related utilities. Costs per life year and per quality-adjusted life year gained (costing year 2017) for fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus budesonide/formoterol were calculated for a lifetime horizon. Results were explored using deterministic sensitivity, scenario and probabilistic analyses. Fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol was associated with gains in life years (0.533) and quality-adjusted life years (0.506) versus budesonide/formoterol, but at slightly increased total costs (£26 416 versus £25 860). This translated to incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of £1042/life year and £1098/quality-adjusted life year for fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol versus budesonide/formoterol. In scenario analyses, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from dominant to £1547/quality-adjusted life year gained. Fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol provides a cost-effective treatment option versus budesonide/formoterol for patients with symptomatic COPD in the UK., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: E. Fenwick reports GSK provided funds to ICON plc to build the model and conduct the analysis in the present study. Conflict of interest: A. Martin is an employee of GlaxoSmithKline. Conflict of interest: M. Schroeder was an employee and shareholder of GlaxoSmithKline plc at the time of the study. Conflict of interest: S.J. Mealing reports grants from GlaxoSmithKline plc during the conduct of the study and outside the submitted work, all of which were paid to ICON Health Economics. Conflict of interest: O. Solanke reports personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline plc during the conduct of the study. Conflict of interest: N. Risebrough has nothing to disclose. Conflict of interest: A.S. Ismaila reports the study was funded GlaxoSmithKline, of which A.S. Ismaila is an employee and shareholder. A.S. Ismaila is also an unpaid, part-time professor at McMaster University., (Copyright ©ERS 2021.)

Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of primary angioplasty, compared with medical management with thrombolytic drugs, to achieve reperfusion after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) from the perspective of the UK NHS., Design: Bayesian evidence synthesis and decision analytic model., Methods: A systematic review was conducted and Bayesian statistical methods used to synthesise evidence from 22 randomised control trials. Resource utilisation was based on UK registry data, published literature and national databases, with unit costs taken from routine NHS sources and published literature., Main Outcome Measure: Costs from a health service perspective and outcomes measured as quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)., Results: For the base case, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of primary angioplasty was 9241 pounds sterling for each additional QALY, with a probability of being cost effective of 0.90 for a cost-effectiveness threshold of 20,000 pounds sterling. Results were sensitive to variations in the additional time required to initiate treatment with primary angioplasty., Conclusions: Primary angioplasty is cost effective for the treatment of AMI on the basis of threshold cost-effectiveness values used in the NHS and subject to a delay of up to about 80 minutes. These findings are mainly explained by the superior mortality benefit and the prevention of non-fatal outcomes associated with primary angioplasty for delays of up to this length.