Suppr超能文献

对获取每质量调整生命年支付意愿的研究进行的系统评价:这是否能证明成本效益阈值的合理性?

A systematic review of studies eliciting willingness-to-pay per quality-adjusted life year: does it justify CE threshold?

作者信息

Nimdet Khachapon, Chaiyakunapruk Nathorn, Vichansavakul Kittaya, Ngorsuraches Surachat

机构信息

Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Prince Songkla University, Hatyai, Thailand.

School of Pharmacy, Monash University Malaysia, Selangor, Malaysia; Center of Pharmaceutical Outcomes Research (CPOR), Department of Pharmacy Practice, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Naresuan University, Phitsanulok, Thailand; School of Pharmacy, University of Wisconsin, Madison, United States of America; School of Population Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

出版信息

PLoS One. 2015 Apr 9;10(4):e0122760. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122760. eCollection 2015.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

A number of studies have been conducted to estimate willingness to pay (WTP) per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) in patients or general population for various diseases. However, there has not been any systematic review summarizing the relationship between WTP per QALY and cost-effectiveness (CE) threshold based on World Health Organization (WHO) recommendation.

OBJECTIVE

To systematically review willingness-to-pay per quality-adjusted-life-year (WTP per QALY) literature, to compare WTP per QALY with Cost-effectiveness (CE) threshold recommended by WHO, and to determine potential influencing factors.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Psyinfo, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Center of Research Dissemination (CRD), and EconLit from inception through 15 July 2014. To be included, studies have to estimate WTP per QALY in health-related issues using stated preference method. Two investigators independently reviewed each abstract, completed full-text reviews, and extracted information for included studies. We compared WTP per QALY to GDP per capita, analyzed, and summarized potential influencing factors.

RESULTS

Out of 3,914 articles founded, 14 studies were included. Most studies (92.85%) used contingent valuation method, while only one study used discrete choice experiments. Sample size varied from 104 to 21,896 persons. The ratio between WTP per QALY and GDP per capita varied widely from 0.05 to 5.40, depending on scenario outcomes (e.g., whether it extended/saved life or improved quality of life), severity of hypothetical scenarios, duration of scenario, and source of funding. The average ratio of WTP per QALY and GDP per capita for extending life or saving life (2.03) was significantly higher than the average for improving quality of life (0.59) with the mean difference of 1.43 (95% CI, 1.81 to 1.06).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review provides an overview summary of all studies estimating WTP per QALY studies. The variation of ratio of WTP per QALY and GDP per capita depended on several factors may prompt discussions on the CE threshold policy. Our research work provides a foundation for defining future direction of decision criteria for an evidence-informed decision making system.

摘要

背景

已经开展了多项研究来估计患者或普通人群为各种疾病的每质量调整生命年(QALY)的支付意愿(WTP)。然而,尚未有任何系统评价总结基于世界卫生组织(WHO)建议的每QALY支付意愿与成本效益(CE)阈值之间的关系。

目的

系统评价每质量调整生命年支付意愿(WTP per QALY)的文献,将每QALY支付意愿与WHO推荐的成本效益(CE)阈值进行比较,并确定潜在影响因素。

方法

我们检索了MEDLINE、EMBASE、Psyinfo、护理学与健康相关文献累积索引(CINAHL)、研究传播中心(CRD)以及EconLit,检索时间从建库至2014年7月15日。纳入的研究必须使用陈述偏好法估计与健康相关问题的每QALY支付意愿。两名研究者独立审查每篇摘要,完成全文审查,并提取纳入研究的信息。我们将每QALY支付意愿与人均国内生产总值进行比较,分析并总结潜在影响因素。

结果

在检索到的3914篇文章中,纳入了14项研究。大多数研究(92.85%)使用了条件估值法,而只有一项研究使用了离散选择实验。样本量从104人到21896人不等。每QALY支付意愿与人均国内生产总值的比率差异很大,从0.05到5.40不等,这取决于情景结果(例如,是否延长/挽救生命或改善生活质量)、假设情景的严重程度、情景持续时间以及资金来源。延长生命或挽救生命的每QALY支付意愿与人均国内生产总值的平均比率(2.03)显著高于改善生活质量的平均比率(0.59),平均差异为1.43(95%CI,1.81至1.06)。

结论

本系统评价提供了所有估计每QALY支付意愿研究的概述总结。每QALY支付意愿与人均国内生产总值比率的变化取决于几个因素,这可能促使人们对成本效益阈值政策进行讨论。我们的研究工作为定义循证决策系统未来决策标准的方向奠定了基础。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/5e92/4391853/20cdca63fa1d/pone.0122760.g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验