AlAujan Shiekha S, Almazrou Saja H, Al-Aqeel Sinaa A
Clinical Pharmacy Department, College of Pharmacy, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Risk Manag Healthc Policy. 2021 Jan 20;14:209-220. doi: 10.2147/RMHP.S285359. eCollection 2021.
Transparency and clarity in reporting of methods used to identify, measure, and value outcomes and resources in published economic evaluations is crucial.
The aims of this review were to identify and assess the quality of published economic evaluation studies in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) region, with a specific focus on methods used to identify, measure, and value cost and outcomes data.
An electronic search of publications from 2009 to October 2019 was performed in three clinical (Medline, Scopus, and EMBASE) and one economic (NHS EED) databases. Full economic evaluations undertaken in GCC countries from any perspective were included. Reference lists of three reviews on the same topic and area were also searched for further eligible articles. The Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist was used for methodological quality assessment. Data on type and source of cost and outcomes data were collected.
Out of 1857 studies identified, 14 relevant studies were eligible and included. Eleven studies were based in Saudi Arabia, and the remaining studies were published in the United Arab of Emirates (UAE), Qatar, and Oman. Majority of the evaluations were based on the Markov modelling (n=8). None of the studies fully fulfilled the CHEERS quality criteria. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was the main outcome (n=10). The EQ-5D was valued using the UK value set tariff (n=6). Published literature was the source of outcomes data in seven studies. Hospital-based data were used as a source of healthcare resource use data in four studies, whereas hospital-based costs (n = 7) combined with other sources such as local/national data were the sources of unit cost data in the majority of the studies.
Rigorous economic evaluations are lacking in the region leading to inaccurate information being given to decision-makers.
在已发表的经济评估中，用于识别、衡量和评估结果及资源的方法的透明度和清晰度至关重要。
本综述的目的是识别和评估海湾合作委员会（GCC）地区已发表的经济评估研究的质量，特别关注用于识别、衡量和评估成本及结果数据的方法。
在三个临床数据库（Medline、Scopus和EMBASE）和一个经济数据库（NHS EED）中对2009年至2019年10月的出版物进行电子检索。纳入了从任何角度对海湾合作委员会国家进行的全面经济评估。还检索了关于同一主题和领域的三篇综述的参考文献列表，以寻找更多符合条件的文章。使用综合卫生经济评估报告标准（CHEERS）清单进行方法学质量评估。收集了关于成本和结果数据的类型及来源的数据。
在识别出的1857项研究中，有14项相关研究符合条件并被纳入。11项研究来自沙特阿拉伯，其余研究发表于阿拉伯联合酋长国（阿联酋）、卡塔尔和阿曼。大多数评估基于马尔可夫模型（n = 8）。没有一项研究完全符合CHEERS质量标准。质量调整生命年（QALYs）是主要结果（n = 10）。EQ-5D使用英国价值集关税进行估值（n = 6）。七项研究中，已发表文献是结果数据的来源。四项研究将基于医院的数据用作医疗保健资源使用数据的来源，而在大多数研究中，基于医院的成本（n = 7）与其他来源（如当地/国家数据）相结合是单位成本数据的来源。
该地区缺乏严格的经济评估，导致向决策者提供的信息不准确。
