Cargando…

Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment

OBJECTIVES: The present study is a systematic review conducted as part of a methodological approach to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the methodology and quality of currently available clinical cost-e...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Droeghaag, Ruud, Schuermans, Valérie N E, Hermans, Sem M M, Smeets, Anouk Y J M, Caelers, Inge J M H, Hiligsmann, Mickaël, Evers, Silvia, van Hemert, Wouter L W, van Santbrink, Henk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36958779
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067871
_version_ 1784912404284440576
author Droeghaag, Ruud
Schuermans, Valérie N E
Hermans, Sem M M
Smeets, Anouk Y J M
Caelers, Inge J M H
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Evers, Silvia
van Hemert, Wouter L W
van Santbrink, Henk
author_facet Droeghaag, Ruud
Schuermans, Valérie N E
Hermans, Sem M M
Smeets, Anouk Y J M
Caelers, Inge J M H
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Evers, Silvia
van Hemert, Wouter L W
van Santbrink, Henk
author_sort Droeghaag, Ruud
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: The present study is a systematic review conducted as part of a methodological approach to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the methodology and quality of currently available clinical cost-effectiveness studies in spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and The National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database were searched through 8 December 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were included if they met all of the following eligibility criteria: (1) spine surgery, (2) the study cost-effectiveness and (3) clinical study. Model-based studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The following data items were extracted and evaluated: pathology, number of participants, intervention(s), year, country, study design, time horizon, comparator(s), utility measurement, effectivity measurement, costs measured, perspective, main result and study quality. RESULTS: 130 economic evaluations were included. Seventy-four of these studies were retrospective studies. The majority of the studies had a time horizon shorter than 2 years. Utility measures varied between the EuroQol 5 dimensions and variations of the Short-Form Health Survey. Effect measures varied widely between Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Neck Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, reoperation rates and adverse events. All studies included direct costs from a healthcare perspective. Indirect costs were included in 47 studies. Total Consensus Health Economic Criteria scores ranged from 2 to 18, with a mean score of 12.0 over all 130 studies. CONCLUSIONS: The comparability of economic evaluations in spine surgery is extremely low due to different study designs, follow-up duration and outcome measurements such as utility, effectiveness and costs. This illustrates the need for uniformity in conducting and reporting economic evaluations in spine surgery.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10040072
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100400722023-03-27 Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment Droeghaag, Ruud Schuermans, Valérie N E Hermans, Sem M M Smeets, Anouk Y J M Caelers, Inge J M H Hiligsmann, Mickaël Evers, Silvia van Hemert, Wouter L W van Santbrink, Henk BMJ Open Health Economics OBJECTIVES: The present study is a systematic review conducted as part of a methodological approach to develop evidence-based recommendations for economic evaluations in spine surgery. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the methodology and quality of currently available clinical cost-effectiveness studies in spine surgery. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic literature review. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, EconLit and The National Institute for Health Research Economic Evaluation Database were searched through 8 December 2022. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Studies were included if they met all of the following eligibility criteria: (1) spine surgery, (2) the study cost-effectiveness and (3) clinical study. Model-based studies were excluded. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: The following data items were extracted and evaluated: pathology, number of participants, intervention(s), year, country, study design, time horizon, comparator(s), utility measurement, effectivity measurement, costs measured, perspective, main result and study quality. RESULTS: 130 economic evaluations were included. Seventy-four of these studies were retrospective studies. The majority of the studies had a time horizon shorter than 2 years. Utility measures varied between the EuroQol 5 dimensions and variations of the Short-Form Health Survey. Effect measures varied widely between Visual Analogue Scale for pain, Neck Disability Index, Oswestry Disability Index, reoperation rates and adverse events. All studies included direct costs from a healthcare perspective. Indirect costs were included in 47 studies. Total Consensus Health Economic Criteria scores ranged from 2 to 18, with a mean score of 12.0 over all 130 studies. CONCLUSIONS: The comparability of economic evaluations in spine surgery is extremely low due to different study designs, follow-up duration and outcome measurements such as utility, effectiveness and costs. This illustrates the need for uniformity in conducting and reporting economic evaluations in spine surgery. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-03-23 /pmc/articles/PMC10040072/ /pubmed/36958779 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067871 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Health Economics
Droeghaag, Ruud
Schuermans, Valérie N E
Hermans, Sem M M
Smeets, Anouk Y J M
Caelers, Inge J M H
Hiligsmann, Mickaël
Evers, Silvia
van Hemert, Wouter L W
van Santbrink, Henk
Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title_full Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title_fullStr Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title_full_unstemmed Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title_short Methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
title_sort methodology of economic evaluations in spine surgery: a systematic review and qualitative assessment
topic Health Economics
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10040072/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36958779
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-067871
work_keys_str_mv AT droeghaagruud methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT schuermansvaleriene methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT hermanssemmm methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT smeetsanoukyjm methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT caelersingejmh methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT hiligsmannmickael methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT everssilvia methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT vanhemertwouterlw methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment
AT vansantbrinkhenk methodologyofeconomicevaluationsinspinesurgeryasystematicreviewandqualitativeassessment