[Cost of lost productivity in pharmacoeconomics analysis. Part II. Survey in the expert group].

The aim of the survey was to collect data on practice and preferences of decision-makers and experts in health economics concerning the role of indirect costs in Poland. The questionnaire contained 18 questions covering the need for indirect costs calculation in economic evaluations and measures used to calculate indirect cost. Fifty four respondents related to health economics returned completed questionnaires. Mean age of respondents was 33,3 years; mean experience in health economics 4.7 years; 43% (23/54) of responders had non-economic background; 30% each were users and doers of health technology assessment reports. All (excluding one) responders indicated that indirect costs should be calculated in pharmacoeconomic studies. Twenty three (i.e., 43%) responders indicated human capital approach as the best method to estimate costs from societal perspective; friction cost method came second best 11%; 42% respondents had no opinion. The doers of economics evaluations pointed to GDP per capita (61%, 11/18), average salary (61%, 11/18), and costs of sick pay or injury benefit (61%, 11/18) as measures which could be used to value production losses. Indirect costs are considered important component of economic evaluations of healthcare interventions in Poland. The lack of widely accepted methods for indirect cost evaluation support further research.