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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |