Department of Health Research Methodology, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
Department of Pharmacy Systems, Outcomes and Policy, College of Pharmacy, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Eur J Health Econ. 2021 Jul;22(5):723-733. doi: 10.1007/s10198-021-01286-0. Epub 2021 Apr 11.
Published health utility studies are increasingly cited in cost-utility analyses to inform reimbursement decision-making. However, there is limited guidance for investigators looking to systematically evaluate the methodological quality of health utility studies or their applicability to decision contexts.
To describe how health utility concepts are reflected in tools intended for use with the health economic literature, particularly with respect to the evaluation of methodological quality and context applicability.
We reviewed the critical appraisal and reporting tools described in a 2012 report published by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), supplemented with a keyword search of MEDLINE and EMBASE, to identify existing tools which include health utility constructs. From these tools, a list of relevant items was compiled and grouped into domain categories based on the methodological or applicability aspect they were directed toward.
Of the 24 tools we identified, 12 contained items relevant to the evaluation of health utilities. Sixty-five items were considered relevant to the evaluation of quality, while 44 were relevant to the evaluation of applicability. Items were arranged into four domains: health state descriptions; selection and description of respondents; elicitation and measurement methods; and other considerations.
As key inputs to cost-utility analyses, health utilities have the potential to significantly impact estimates of cost-effectiveness. Existing tools contain only general items related to the conduct or use of health utility studies. There is a need to develop tools that systematically evaluate the methodological quality and applicability of health utility studies.
发表的健康效用研究越来越多地被引用到成本效用分析中，为报销决策提供信息。然而，对于希望系统评估健康效用研究的方法学质量或其对决策背景的适用性的研究人员来说，指导有限。
描述健康效用概念在旨在用于健康经济文献的工具中是如何体现的，特别是在评估方法学质量和适用性方面。
我们回顾了医疗保健研究和质量机构（AHRQ）在 2012 年发布的一份报告中描述的关键评估和报告工具，并通过对 MEDLINE 和 EMBASE 的关键字搜索，来确定现有的包含健康效用结构的工具。从这些工具中，我们编制了一份相关项目清单，并根据它们所针对的方法学或适用性方面将其分组到域类别中。
在我们确定的 24 个工具中，有 12 个包含与评估健康效用相关的项目。有 65 项被认为与质量评估有关，而 44 项与适用性评估有关。项目被安排在四个领域：健康状况描述；受访者的选择和描述； elicitation 和测量方法；以及其他考虑因素。
作为成本效用分析的关键投入，健康效用有可能对成本效益估计产生重大影响。现有工具仅包含与健康效用研究的进行或使用有关的一般项目。需要开发工具来系统地评估健康效用研究的方法学质量和适用性。
