Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2/2017

01.04.2017 | Systematic Review

Many Miles to Go: A Systematic Review of the State of Cost-Utility Analyses in Brazil

verfasst von: Alessandro G. Campolina, Luciana M. Rozman, Tassia C. Decimoni, Roseli Leandro, Hillegonda M. D. Novaes, Patrícia Coelho De Soárez

Erschienen in: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy | Ausgabe 2/2017

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Little is known about the quality and quantity of cost-utility analyses (CUAs) in Brazil.

Objective

The objective of this study was to provide a systematic review of published CUAs of healthcare technologies in Brazil.

Methods

We performed a systematic review of economic evaluations studies published in MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS (Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature), SciELO (Scientific Electronic Library Online), NHS EED (National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database), HTA (Health Technology Assessment) Database, Web of Science, Scopus, Bireme (Biblioteca Regional de Medicina), BVS ECOS (Health Economics database of the Brazilian Virtual Library of Health), and SISREBRATS (Sistema de Informação da Rede Brasileira de Avaliação de Tecnologias em Saúde [Brazilian Network for the Evaluation of Health Technologies]) from 1980 to 2013. Articles were included if they were CUAs according to the classification devised by Drummond et al. Two independent reviewers screened articles for relevance and carried out data extraction. Disagreements were resolved through discussion or through consultation with a third reviewer. We performed a qualitative narrative synthesis.

Results

Of the 535 health economic evaluations (HEEs) relating to Brazil, only 40 were CUAs and therefore included in the analysis. Most studies adhered to methodological guidelines for quality of reporting and 77.5% used quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as the health outcome. Of these studies, 51.6% did not report the population used to elicit preferences for outcomes and 45.2% used a specific population such as expert opinion. The preference elicitation method was not reported in 58.1% of these studies. The majority (80.6%) of studies did not report the instrument used to derive health state valuations and no publication reported whether tariffs (or preference weights) were national or international. No study mentioned the methodology used to estimate QALYs.

Conclusions

Many published Brazilian cost-utility studies adhere to key recommended general methods for HEE; however, the use of QALY calculations is far from being the current international standard. Development of health preferences research can contribute to quality improvement of health technology assessment reports in Brazil.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. London: Oxford; 2015. p. 464. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Claxton K, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. 4th ed. London: Oxford; 2015. p. 464.
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253–8.CrossRefPubMed Weinstein MC, Siegel JE, Gold MR, Kamlet MS, Russell LB. Recommendations of the Panel on Cost-effectiveness in Health and Medicine. JAMA. 1996;276:1253–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health. 2006;9:213–8.CrossRefPubMed Brauer CA, Rosen AB, Greenberg D, Neumann PJ. Trends in the measurement of health utilities in published cost-utility analyses. Value Health. 2006;9:213–8.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Hunter RM, Baio G, Butt T, Morris S, Round J, Freemantle N. An educational review of the statistical issues in analysing utility data for cost-utility analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:355–66.CrossRefPubMed Hunter RM, Baio G, Butt T, Morris S, Round J, Freemantle N. An educational review of the statistical issues in analysing utility data for cost-utility analysis. Pharmacoeconomics. 2015;33:355–66.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21.CrossRefPubMed Whitehead SJ, Ali S. Health outcomes in economic evaluation: the QALY and utilities. Br Med Bull. 2010;96:5–21.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Haagsma JA, Polinder S, Cassini A, Colzani E, Havelaar AH. Review of disability weight studies: comparison of methodological choices and values. Popul Health Metr. 2014;12:20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Haagsma JA, Polinder S, Cassini A, Colzani E, Havelaar AH. Review of disability weight studies: comparison of methodological choices and values. Popul Health Metr. 2014;12:20.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Campolina AG, Bortoluzzo AB, Ferraz MB, Ciconelli RM. Validation of the Brazilian version of the generic six-dimensional short form quality of life questionnaire (SF-6D Brazil) [in Portuguese]. Cien Saude Colet. 2011;16:3103–10.CrossRefPubMed Campolina AG, Bortoluzzo AB, Ferraz MB, Ciconelli RM. Validation of the Brazilian version of the generic six-dimensional short form quality of life questionnaire (SF-6D Brazil) [in Portuguese]. Cien Saude Colet. 2011;16:3103–10.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Cruz LN, Camey SA, Hoffmann JF, Rowen D, Brazier JE, Fleck MP, et al. Estimating the SF-6D value set for a population-based sample of Brazilians. Value Health. 2011;14:S108–14.CrossRefPubMed Cruz LN, Camey SA, Hoffmann JF, Rowen D, Brazier JE, Fleck MP, et al. Estimating the SF-6D value set for a population-based sample of Brazilians. Value Health. 2011;14:S108–14.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Andrade MV, Noronha K, Kind P, Maia AC, Menezes RM, Reis CB, et al. Societal preferences for EQ-5D health states from a Brazilian population survey. Value Health Reg Issues. 2013;2:405–12.CrossRef Andrade MV, Noronha K, Kind P, Maia AC, Menezes RM, Reis CB, et al. Societal preferences for EQ-5D health states from a Brazilian population survey. Value Health Reg Issues. 2013;2:405–12.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Andrade MV, Noronha KV, Maia AC, Kind P. What matters most? Evidence-based findings of health dimensions affecting the societal preferences for EQ-5D health states. Cad Saude Publ. 2013;29(Suppl 1):S59–72.CrossRef Andrade MV, Noronha KV, Maia AC, Kind P. What matters most? Evidence-based findings of health dimensions affecting the societal preferences for EQ-5D health states. Cad Saude Publ. 2013;29(Suppl 1):S59–72.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat ReM Menezes, Andrade MV, Noronha KV, Kind P. EQ-5D-3L as a health measure of Brazilian adult population. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:2761–76.CrossRef ReM Menezes, Andrade MV, Noronha KV, Kind P. EQ-5D-3L as a health measure of Brazilian adult population. Qual Life Res. 2015;24:2761–76.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Santos M, Cintra MA, Monteiro AL, Santos B, Gusmão-Filho F, Andrade MV, et al. Brazilian valuation of EQ-5D-3L health states: results from a saturation study. Med Decis Mak. 2016;36:253–63.CrossRef Santos M, Cintra MA, Monteiro AL, Santos B, Gusmão-Filho F, Andrade MV, et al. Brazilian valuation of EQ-5D-3L health states: results from a saturation study. Med Decis Mak. 2016;36:253–63.CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:245–50.CrossRefPubMed Cooper N, Coyle D, Abrams K, Mugford M, Sutton A. Use of evidence in decision models: an appraisal of health technology assessments in the UK since 1997. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10:245–50.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Ministério da Saúde, Brasil. Decreto no 7.646, de 21 de dezembro de 2011. Regulamenta a Lei no 12.401, de 28 de abril de 2011 e Dispõe sobre a Comissão Nacional de Incorporação de Tecnologias no Sistema Único de Saúde e sobre o processo administrativo para incorporação, exclusão e alteração de tecnologias em saúde pelo Sistema Único de Saúde-SUS. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2011. Ministério da Saúde, Brasil. Decreto no 7.646, de 21 de dezembro de 2011. Regulamenta a Lei no 12.401, de 28 de abril de 2011 e Dispõe sobre a Comissão Nacional de Incorporação de Tecnologias no Sistema Único de Saúde e sobre o processo administrativo para incorporação, exclusão e alteração de tecnologias em saúde pelo Sistema Único de Saúde-SUS. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2011.
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Silva HP, Petramale CA, Elias FT. Advances and challenges to the Brazilian policy of health technology management [in Portuguese]. Rev Saude Publ. 2012;46(Suppl 1):83–90.CrossRef Silva HP, Petramale CA, Elias FT. Advances and challenges to the Brazilian policy of health technology management [in Portuguese]. Rev Saude Publ. 2012;46(Suppl 1):83–90.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Drummond MF, Schwartz JS, Jönsson B, Luce BR, Neumann PJ, Siebert U, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:244–58 (discussion 362–8). Drummond MF, Schwartz JS, Jönsson B, Luce BR, Neumann PJ, Siebert U, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:244–58 (discussion 362–8).
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ. 1996;313:275–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ. 1996;313:275–83.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Stalmeier PF, Goldstein MK, Holmes AM, Lenert L, Miyamoto J, Stiggelbout AM, et al. What should be reported in a methods section on utility assessment? Med Decis Mak. 2001;21:200–7.CrossRef Stalmeier PF, Goldstein MK, Holmes AM, Lenert L, Miyamoto J, Stiggelbout AM, et al. What should be reported in a methods section on utility assessment? Med Decis Mak. 2001;21:200–7.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Decimoni TC, Leandro R, Soarez P, Craig D. Systematic review of economic evaluation of health technologies developed in Brazil from 1980–2013. Value Health. 2014;17:A438.CrossRefPubMed Decimoni TC, Leandro R, Soarez P, Craig D. Systematic review of economic evaluation of health technologies developed in Brazil from 1980–2013. Value Health. 2014;17:A438.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Centre for Reviews and Disseminations. Systematic reviews of economic evaluations. CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care: Centre for Reviews and Disseminations. York: University of York; 2009. Centre for Reviews and Disseminations. Systematic reviews of economic evaluations. CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care: Centre for Reviews and Disseminations. York: University of York; 2009.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2005.
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Coyle D, M Lee K. Evidence-based economic evaluation: how the use of different data sources can impact results. In: Donaldson, C Mugford M, Vale L, editors. Evidence-based health economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2002. p. 55–66. Coyle D, M Lee K. Evidence-based economic evaluation: how the use of different data sources can impact results. In: Donaldson, C Mugford M, Vale L, editors. Evidence-based health economics: from effectiveness to efficiency in systematic review. London: BMJ Publishing Group; 2002. p. 55–66.
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Neumann PJ, Thorat T, Shi J, Saret CJ, Cohen JT. The changing face of the cost-utility literature, 1990–2012. Value Health. 2015;18:271–7.CrossRefPubMed Neumann PJ, Thorat T, Shi J, Saret CJ, Cohen JT. The changing face of the cost-utility literature, 1990–2012. Value Health. 2015;18:271–7.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Teerawattananon Y, Russell S, Mugford M. A systematic review of economic evaluation literature in Thailand: are the data good enough to be used by policy-makers? Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25:467–79.CrossRefPubMed Teerawattananon Y, Russell S, Mugford M. A systematic review of economic evaluation literature in Thailand: are the data good enough to be used by policy-makers? Pharmacoeconomics. 2007;25:467–79.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee KS, Brouwer WB, Lee SI, Koo HW. Introducing economic evaluation as a policy tool in Korea: will decision makers get quality information?: a critical review of published Korean economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23:709–21.CrossRefPubMed Lee KS, Brouwer WB, Lee SI, Koo HW. Introducing economic evaluation as a policy tool in Korea: will decision makers get quality information?: a critical review of published Korean economic evaluations. Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23:709–21.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Kularatna S, Whitty JA, Johnson NW, Scuffham PA. Health state valuation in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of the literature. Value Health. 2013;16:1091–9.CrossRefPubMed Kularatna S, Whitty JA, Johnson NW, Scuffham PA. Health state valuation in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of the literature. Value Health. 2013;16:1091–9.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Traebert J, Nickel DA, Traebert E, Escalante JJ, Schneider IJ. The burden of infectious diseases in the Brazilian Southern state of Santa Catarina. J Infect Public Health. 2016;9:181–91.CrossRefPubMed Traebert J, Nickel DA, Traebert E, Escalante JJ, Schneider IJ. The burden of infectious diseases in the Brazilian Southern state of Santa Catarina. J Infect Public Health. 2016;9:181–91.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Leite Ida C, Valente JG, Schramm JM, Daumas RP, Rodrigues Rdo N, Santos Mde F, et al. Burden of disease in Brazil and its regions, 2008. Cad Saude Publ. 2015;31:1551–64.CrossRef Leite Ida C, Valente JG, Schramm JM, Daumas RP, Rodrigues Rdo N, Santos Mde F, et al. Burden of disease in Brazil and its regions, 2008. Cad Saude Publ. 2015;31:1551–64.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Victora CG, Barreto ML, do Carmo Leal M, Monteiro CA, Schmidt MI, Paim J, et al. Health conditions and health-policy innovations in Brazil: the way forward. Lancet. 2011;377:2042–53. Victora CG, Barreto ML, do Carmo Leal M, Monteiro CA, Schmidt MI, Paim J, et al. Health conditions and health-policy innovations in Brazil: the way forward. Lancet. 2011;377:2042–53.
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)–explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16:231–50.CrossRefPubMed Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C, Moher D, Greenberg D, et al. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)–explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2013;16:231–50.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Ministério da Saúde, Brasil. Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos. Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia. Diretrizes metodológicas: Diretriz de Avaliação Econômica/Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos. In: Secretaria de Ciência TeIEDdCeT, editor. 2nd ed. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2014. p. 132. Ministério da Saúde, Brasil. Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos. Departamento de Ciência e Tecnologia. Diretrizes metodológicas: Diretriz de Avaliação Econômica/Ministério da Saúde, Secretaria de Ciência, Tecnologia e Insumos Estratégicos. In: Secretaria de Ciência TeIEDdCeT, editor. 2nd ed. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2014. p. 132.
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Thorat T, Lin PJ, Neumann PJ. The state of cost-utility analyses in Asia: a systematic review. Value Health Reg Issues. 2015;6C:7–13.CrossRef Thorat T, Lin PJ, Neumann PJ. The state of cost-utility analyses in Asia: a systematic review. Value Health Reg Issues. 2015;6C:7–13.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Gavaza P, Rascati KL, Oladapo AO, Khoza S. The state of health economic research in South Africa: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30:925–40.CrossRefPubMed Gavaza P, Rascati KL, Oladapo AO, Khoza S. The state of health economic research in South Africa: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30:925–40.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Gavaza P, Rascati KL, Oladapo AO, Khoza S. The state of health economic evaluation research in Nigeria: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:539–53.PubMed Gavaza P, Rascati KL, Oladapo AO, Khoza S. The state of health economic evaluation research in Nigeria: a systematic review. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:539–53.PubMed
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Iglesias CP, Drummond MF, Rovira J. Health-care decision-making processes in Latin America: problems and prospects for the use of economic evaluation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:1–14.CrossRefPubMed Iglesias CP, Drummond MF, Rovira J. Health-care decision-making processes in Latin America: problems and prospects for the use of economic evaluation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:1–14.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Hoomans T, Severens JL, van der Roer N, Delwel GO. Methodological quality of economic evaluations of new pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30:219–27.CrossRefPubMed Hoomans T, Severens JL, van der Roer N, Delwel GO. Methodological quality of economic evaluations of new pharmaceuticals in The Netherlands. Pharmacoeconomics. 2012;30:219–27.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Neumann PJ, Fang CH, Cohen JT. 30 years of pharmaceutical cost-utility analyses: growth, diversity and methodological improvement. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27:861–72.CrossRefPubMed Neumann PJ, Fang CH, Cohen JT. 30 years of pharmaceutical cost-utility analyses: growth, diversity and methodological improvement. Pharmacoeconomics. 2009;27:861–72.CrossRefPubMed
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Freemantle N, Mason J. Publication bias in clinical trials and economic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;12:10–6.CrossRefPubMed Freemantle N, Mason J. Publication bias in clinical trials and economic analyses. Pharmacoeconomics. 1997;12:10–6.CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Many Miles to Go: A Systematic Review of the State of Cost-Utility Analyses in Brazil
verfasst von
Alessandro G. Campolina
Luciana M. Rozman
Tassia C. Decimoni
Roseli Leandro
Hillegonda M. D. Novaes
Patrícia Coelho De Soárez
Publikationsdatum
01.04.2017
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy / Ausgabe 2/2017
Print ISSN: 1175-5652
Elektronische ISSN: 1179-1896
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-016-0290-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2017

Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2/2017 Zur Ausgabe