Cargando…

Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are useful tools to inform transparent healthcare decision-making. Consideration of health economic evidence (HEE) during CPG development in a structured manner remains a challenge globally and locally. This study explored the views,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilkinson, Maryke, Hofman, Karen J., Young, Taryn, Schmidt, Bey-Marrié, Kredo, Tamara
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8310693/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34304743
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06747-z
_version_ 1783728815650897920
author Wilkinson, Maryke
Hofman, Karen J.
Young, Taryn
Schmidt, Bey-Marrié
Kredo, Tamara
author_facet Wilkinson, Maryke
Hofman, Karen J.
Young, Taryn
Schmidt, Bey-Marrié
Kredo, Tamara
author_sort Wilkinson, Maryke
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are useful tools to inform transparent healthcare decision-making. Consideration of health economic evidence (HEE) during CPG development in a structured manner remains a challenge globally and locally. This study explored the views, current practice, training needs and challenges faced by CPG developers in the production and use of HEE for CPGs in South Africa. METHODS: This mixed-methods study comprised an online survey and a focus group discussion. The survey was piloted and subsequently sent to CPG role players - evidence reviewers, CPG panellists, academics involved with training in relevant disciplines like health economics and public health, implementers and funders. The focus group participants hold strategic roles in CPG development and health economic activities nationally. The survey evaluated mean values, measures of variability, and percentages for Likert scales, while narrative components were thematically analysed. Focus group data were manually coded, thematically analysed and verified. RESULTS: The survey (n = 55 respondents to 245 surveys distributed) and one focus group (n = 5 participants from 10 people invited) occurred between October 2018 and February 2019. We found the most consistent reason why HEE should inform CPG decisions was ‘making more efficient use of limited financial resources’. This was explained by numerous context and methodological barriers. Focus groups participants noted that consideration of complex HEE are not achievable without bolstering skills in applying evidence-based medicine principles. Further concerns include lack of clarity of standard methods; inequitable and opaque topic selection across private and public sectors; inadequate skills of CPG panel members to use HEE; and the ability of health economists to communicate results in accessible ways. Overall, in the absence of clarity about process and methods, politics and interests may drive CPG decisions about which interventions to implement. CONCLUSIONS: HEE should ideally be considered in CPG decisions in South Africa. However, this will remain hampered until the CPG community agree on methods and processes for using HEE in CPGs. Focused investment by national government to address the challenges identified by the study is imperative for a better return on investment as National Health Insurance moves forward. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06747-z.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8310693
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-83106932021-07-26 Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study Wilkinson, Maryke Hofman, Karen J. Young, Taryn Schmidt, Bey-Marrié Kredo, Tamara BMC Health Serv Res Research BACKGROUND: Evidence-informed clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are useful tools to inform transparent healthcare decision-making. Consideration of health economic evidence (HEE) during CPG development in a structured manner remains a challenge globally and locally. This study explored the views, current practice, training needs and challenges faced by CPG developers in the production and use of HEE for CPGs in South Africa. METHODS: This mixed-methods study comprised an online survey and a focus group discussion. The survey was piloted and subsequently sent to CPG role players - evidence reviewers, CPG panellists, academics involved with training in relevant disciplines like health economics and public health, implementers and funders. The focus group participants hold strategic roles in CPG development and health economic activities nationally. The survey evaluated mean values, measures of variability, and percentages for Likert scales, while narrative components were thematically analysed. Focus group data were manually coded, thematically analysed and verified. RESULTS: The survey (n = 55 respondents to 245 surveys distributed) and one focus group (n = 5 participants from 10 people invited) occurred between October 2018 and February 2019. We found the most consistent reason why HEE should inform CPG decisions was ‘making more efficient use of limited financial resources’. This was explained by numerous context and methodological barriers. Focus groups participants noted that consideration of complex HEE are not achievable without bolstering skills in applying evidence-based medicine principles. Further concerns include lack of clarity of standard methods; inequitable and opaque topic selection across private and public sectors; inadequate skills of CPG panel members to use HEE; and the ability of health economists to communicate results in accessible ways. Overall, in the absence of clarity about process and methods, politics and interests may drive CPG decisions about which interventions to implement. CONCLUSIONS: HEE should ideally be considered in CPG decisions in South Africa. However, this will remain hampered until the CPG community agree on methods and processes for using HEE in CPGs. Focused investment by national government to address the challenges identified by the study is imperative for a better return on investment as National Health Insurance moves forward. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06747-z. BioMed Central 2021-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC8310693/ /pubmed/34304743 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06747-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Wilkinson, Maryke
Hofman, Karen J.
Young, Taryn
Schmidt, Bey-Marrié
Kredo, Tamara
Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title_full Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title_fullStr Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title_full_unstemmed Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title_short Health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in South Africa: a mixed-methods study
title_sort health economic evidence in clinical guidelines in south africa: a mixed-methods study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8310693/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34304743
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12913-021-06747-z
work_keys_str_mv AT wilkinsonmaryke healtheconomicevidenceinclinicalguidelinesinsouthafricaamixedmethodsstudy
AT hofmankarenj healtheconomicevidenceinclinicalguidelinesinsouthafricaamixedmethodsstudy
AT youngtaryn healtheconomicevidenceinclinicalguidelinesinsouthafricaamixedmethodsstudy
AT schmidtbeymarrie healtheconomicevidenceinclinicalguidelinesinsouthafricaamixedmethodsstudy
AT kredotamara healtheconomicevidenceinclinicalguidelinesinsouthafricaamixedmethodsstudy