Evaluación de la calidad metodológica de la literatura en evaluación económica en salud en Colombia: una revisión sistemática

Atehortúa, Sara; Ceballos, Mateo; Gaviria, Carlos; Mejía, Ana María

doi:10.7705/biomedica.v33i4.1536

Cited by 12 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As reported in earlier systematic reviews of HEE studies in Latin America ( 17 , 26 , 27 ), our findings indicated that CEA was the most prevalent (39.1%, 77/197) study type for full HEE conducted in Brazilian settings between 1980 and 2013. This might be explained by the relative simplicity of the CEA approach compared with CUA that requires developing robust methodology to value health state preferences.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluation Studies Developed in Brazil from 1980 to 2013

Decimoni

Leandro

Rozman

et al. 2018

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBrazil has sought to use economic evaluation to support healthcare decision-making processes. While a number of health economic evaluations (HEEs) have been conducted, no study has systematically reviewed the quality of Brazilian HEE. The objective of this systematic review was to provide an overview regarding the state of HEE research and to evaluate the number, characteristics, and quality of reporting of published HEE studies conducted in a Brazilian setting.MethodsWe systematically searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Latin American, and Caribbean Literature on Health Sciences Database, Scientific Electronic Library Online, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, health technology assessment Database, Bireme, and Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde Economia da Saúde); citation indexes (SCOPUS, Web of Science), and Sistema de Informação da Rede Brasileira de Avaliação de Tecnologia em Saúde. Partial and full HEEs published between 1980 and 2013 that referred to a Brazilian setting were considered for inclusion.ResultsIn total, 535 studies were included in the review, 36.8% of these were considered to be full HEE. The category of healthcare technologies more frequently assessed were procedures (34.8%) and drugs (28.8%) which main objective was treatment (72.1%). Forty-four percent of the studies reported their funding source and 36% reported a conflict of interest. Overall, the full HEE quality of reporting was satisfactory. But some items were generally poorly reported and significant improvement is required: (1) methods used to estimate healthcare resource use quantities and unit costs, (2) methods used to estimate utility values, (3) sources of funding, and (4) conflicts of interest.ConclusionA steady number of HEE have been published in Brazil since 1980. To improve their contribution to inform national healthcare policy efforts need to be made to enhance the quality of reporting of HEEs and promote improvements in the way HEEs are designed, implemented (i.e., using sound methods for HEEs) and reported.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 84%

“…This systematic review reveals a steady growing trend in the number of HEE studies being published in the last 6 years (2008–2013). Interestingly, this phenomenon is also observed in Colombia ( 26 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluation Studies Developed in Brazil from 1980 to 2013

Decimoni

Leandro

Rozman

et al. 2018

Front. Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Los resultados encontrados denotan la necesidad de avanzar en procesos de adaptación transcultural de los instrumentos que ya existen para evaluar las diferentes áreas de la APS ya que unas de las dificultades del uso internacional de estos instrumentos es la magnitud de los cambios que suelen sufrir cuando son adaptados a diferentes contextos sin atender a recomendaciones sobre este tipo de procesos (22) . Además, a partir de estos resultados, se evidencia que hay dificultades en la estandarización de instrumentos que evalúen la APS, esta misma dificultad ha sido señalada en otro tipo de evaluaciones en el sector salud (23)(24) .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Instrumentos para la evaluación de la atención primaria de salud: una revisión narrativa

Álvarez

Giraldo-Osorio

2015

eglobal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objetivo: Realizar una revisión narrativa sobre artículos que presentan instrumentos utilizados para la evaluación de la atención primaria de salud a nivel mundial.<br />Materiales y métodos: La búsqueda se realizó en Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane y Lilacs de artículos publicados entre 2008 y 2013. Los descriptores utilizados fueron: primary health care, health care evaluation mechanisms, questionnaires and validation study. Como criterios de elegibilidad de los artículos se incluyeron tres idiomas y estudios de validación. Se construyó una matriz de análisis por base de datos con las características de cada artículo, luego se consolidó una matriz final con los artículos que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión y se analizaron los instrumentos encontrados. El análisis de la información se llevó a cabo por las dos autoras de forma independiente, para una mayor objetividad.<br />Resultados: Se obtuvieron 128 artículos que cumplieron con los criterios de inclusión establecidos en el estudio. El porcentaje de instrumentos identificados por categorías de análisis fueron: Estilos de vida y enfermedades crónicas 20,3%, Estrategia de APS – Administración 5,4%, Estrategia de APS - Relación Equipo de salud Usuario 23,4%, Salud Mental 28,9% y otras áreas temáticas 21,9%.<br />Conclusiones: Existe una amplia y variada disponibilidad de instrumentos genéricos y específicos que han sido validados en el contexto mundial para evaluar la estrategia de atención primaria de salud, sobre los cuales es posible reconstruir la mejor evidencia como herramienta de trabajo.

show abstract

“…All costs were expressed in 2015 US dollars (exchange rate of US $1 = 3,149.47 Colombian pesos [COP]). A discount annual rate of 3% for both costs and results was included in the model according to the recommendations from the international literature [31,32].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Mucosal Leishmaniasis diagnosis with PCR-based vs parasitological tests in Colombia

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To estimate the cost-effectiveness of available diagnosis alternatives for Mucosal Leishmaniasis (ML) in Colombian suspected patients. A simulation model of the disease’s natural history was built with a decision tree and Markov models. The model´s parameters were identified by systematic review and validated by expert consensus. A bottom-up cost analysis to estimate the costs of diagnostic strategies and treatment per case was performed by reviewing 48 clinical records of patients diagnosed with ML. The diagnostic strategies compared were as follows: 1) no diagnosis; 2) parasite culture, biopsy, indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA), and Montenegro skin test (MST) combined ; 3) parasite culture, biopsy, and IFA combined; 4) PCR-miniexon; and 5) PCR-kDNA. Three scenarios were modeled in patients with ML clinical suspicion, according to ML prevalence scenarios: high, medium and low. Adjusted sensitivity and specificity parameters of a combination of diagnostic tests were estimated with a discrete event simulation (DES) model. For each alternative, the costs and health outcomes were estimated. The time horizon was life expectancy, considering the average age at diagnosis of 31 years. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated per Disability Life Year (DALY) avoided, and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. A threshold of willingness to pay (WTP) of three-time gross domestic product per capita (GDPpc) (US$ 15,795) and a discount rate of 3% was considered. The analysis perspective was the third payer (Health System). All costs were reported in American dollars as of 2015. PCR- kDNA was the cost-effective alternative in clinical suspicion levels: low, medium and high with ICERs of US$ 7,909.39, US$ 5,559.33 and US$ 4,458.92 per DALY avoided, respectively. ML diagnostic tests based on PCR are cost-effective strategies, regardless of the level of clinical suspicion. PCR-kDNA was the most cost-effective strategy in the competitive scenario with the parameters included in the present model.

show abstract

Evaluación de la calidad metodológica de la literatura en evaluación económica en salud en Colombia: una revisión sistemática

Cited by 12 publications

References 31 publications

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluation Studies Developed in Brazil from 1980 to 2013

Systematic Review of Health Economic Evaluation Studies Developed in Brazil from 1980 to 2013

Instrumentos para la evaluación de la atención primaria de salud: una revisión narrativa

Cost-effectiveness analysis of Mucosal Leishmaniasis diagnosis with PCR-based vs parasitological tests in Colombia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About