Roberts Melissa H, Takeda Mikiko Y, Kindilien Shannon, Barqawi Yazan K, Borrego Matthew E
a Department of Pharmacy Practice and Administrative Sciences, College of Pharmacy , University of New Mexico , Albuquerque , USA.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018 Oct;18(5):487-503. doi: 10.1080/14737167.2018.1489243. Epub 2018 Jun 28.
INTRODUCTION: Antiepileptic drug (AED) treatments seek to control seizures with minimal or no adverse effects, effects which can substantially impact costs and outcomes for patients, caregivers, and third party payers. The First and Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine recommend inclusion of a societal reference case, even in studies conducted from a healthcare sector perspective, for comparability of findings across studies. Cost and outcome evaluation components include direct medical, non-direct medical-related (e.g. patient-time and transportation costs for treatment) and non-healthcare sectors (e.g. lost productivity). AREAS COVERED: Guided by Second Panel recommendations, this review developed an overall impact inventory and detailed adverse effect impact inventory to assess the scope and methods in published economic evaluations of AED treatments for adults with chronic epilepsy. Societal perspective evaluations or evaluations that utilized quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) as an outcome were reviewed. The majority of reviewed articles were healthcare sector perspective studies, methods for estimating QALYs varied widely, and a minority considered specific AED treatment adverse effects. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Only considering a healthcare sector perspective fails to provide full information for patients on AED treatments. Using an impact inventory to guide study scope and design will facilitate full reporting of costs and benefits.
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2018-10
Health Technol Assess. 2006-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-2-1
Seizure. 2014-3
Epilepsy Behav. 2017-11
Epilepsia. 2017-11
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016-11-7