Suppr超能文献

辅助性乳腺癌放射治疗的卫生经济评价系统评价:用数字说话的质量。

A systematic review of health economic evaluation in adjuvant breast radiotherapy: Quality counted by numbers.

机构信息

Ghent University Hospital, Radiation Oncology Department, Belgium.

Ghent University Hospital, Radiation Oncology Department, Belgium.

出版信息

Radiother Oncol. 2017 Nov;125(2):186-192. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2017.08.034. Epub 2017 Sep 17.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Evolving practice in adjuvant breast radiotherapy inevitably impacts healthcare budgets. This is reflected in a rise of health economic evaluations (HEE) in this domain. The available HEE literature was analysed qualitatively and quantitatively, using available instruments.

METHODS

HEEs published between 1/1/2000 and 31/10/2016 were retrieved through a systematic search in Medline, Cochrane and Embase. A quality-assessment using CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) was translated into a quantitative score and compared with Tufts Medical Centre CEA registry and Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) results.

RESULTS

Twenty cost-effectiveness analyses (CEA) and thirteen cost comparisons (CC) were analysed. In qualitative evaluation, valuation or justification of data sources, population heterogeneity and discussion on generalizability, in addition to declaration on funding, were often absent or incomplete. After quantification, the average CHEERS-scores were 74% (CI 66.9-81.1%) and 75.6% (CI 70.7-80.5%) for CEAs and CCs respectively. CEA-scores did not differ significantly from Tufts and QHES-scores.

CONCLUSION

Quantitative CHEERS evaluation is feasible and yields comparable results to validated instruments. HEE in adjuvant breast radiotherapy is of acceptable quality, however, further efforts are needed to improve comprehensive reporting of all data, indispensable for assessing relevance, reliability and generalizability of results.

摘要

背景

辅助性乳腺癌放射治疗的实践在不断发展,这不可避免地会影响医疗保健预算。这反映在该领域健康经济评估(HEE)的增加上。本文通过对现有文献进行定性和定量分析,使用现有的工具来分析可用的 HEE 文献。

方法

通过系统搜索 Medline、Cochrane 和 Embase,检索了 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2016 年 10 月 31 日期间发表的 HEE。使用 CHEERS(综合健康经济评估报告标准)进行质量评估,并将其转化为定量评分,并与 Tufts 医疗中心 CEA 登记处和健康经济研究质量(QHES)结果进行比较。

结果

分析了 20 项成本效益分析(CEA)和 13 项成本比较(CC)。在定性评估中,对数据来源的估值或证明、人群异质性以及对普遍性的讨论,以及对资金的声明,往往缺失或不完整。在量化后,CEA 和 CC 的平均 CHEERS 评分分别为 74%(CI 66.9-81.1%)和 75.6%(CI 70.7-80.5%)。CEA 评分与 Tufts 和 QHES 评分无显著差异。

结论

定量 CHEERS 评估是可行的,并且产生的结果与经过验证的工具具有可比性。辅助性乳腺癌放射治疗的 HEE 质量是可以接受的,然而,需要进一步努力来提高所有数据的综合报告,这对于评估结果的相关性、可靠性和普遍性至关重要。

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