Centre for Applied Health Economics, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD, Australia.
Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Gold Coast, QLD, Australia.
Health Policy Plan. 2022 Apr 12;37(4):514-522. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czac005.
There has been an increased interest in health technology assessment and economic evaluations for health policy in Ethiopia over the last few years. In this systematic review, we examined the scope and quality of healthcare economic evaluation studies in Ethiopia. We searched seven electronic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINHAL, Econlit, York CRD databases and CEA Tufts) from inception to May 2021 to identify published full health economic evaluations of a health-related intervention or programme in Ethiopia. This was supplemented with forward and backward citation searches of included articles, manual search of key government websites, the Disease Control Priorities-Ethiopia project and WHO-CHOICE programme. The quality of reporting of economic evaluations was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. The extracted data were grouped into subcategories based on the subject of the economic evaluation, organized into tables and reported narratively. This review identified 34 full economic evaluations conducted between 2009 and 2021. Around 14 (41%) of studies focussed on health service delivery, 8 (24%) on pharmaceuticals, vaccines and devices, and 4 (12%) on public-health programmes. The interventions were mostly preventive in nature and focussed on communicable diseases (n = 19; 56%) and maternal and child health (n = 6; 18%). Cost-effectiveness ratios varied widely from cost-saving to more than US $37 313 per life saved depending on the setting, perspectives, types of interventions and disease conditions. While the overall quality of included studies was judged as moderate (meeting 69% of CHEERS checklist), only four out of 27 cost-effectiveness studies characterized heterogeneity. There is a need for building local technical capacity to enhance the design, conduct and reporting of health economic evaluations in Ethiopia.
近年来,人们对埃塞俄比亚卫生政策的卫生技术评估和经济评估越来越感兴趣。在这项系统评价中,我们检查了埃塞俄比亚医疗保健经济评估研究的范围和质量。我们从建库到 2021 年 5 月,在 7 个电子数据库(PubMed/MEDLINE、EMBASE、PsycINFO、CINHAL、Econlit、York CRD 数据库和 CEA Tufts)中搜索了已发表的关于埃塞俄比亚与健康相关干预或方案的全健康经济评估。此外,还对纳入文章进行了前瞻性和回溯性引文搜索,对纳入文章进行了手动搜索,包括政府的主要网站、疾病控制优先事项-埃塞俄比亚项目和世卫组织-选择方案。使用健康经济评估报告标准(CHEERS)清单评估经济评估报告的质量。提取的数据根据经济评估的主题分为亚类,组织成表格并以叙述的方式报告。本综述确定了 2009 年至 2021 年期间进行的 34 项全经济评估。约有 14 项(41%)研究侧重于卫生服务提供,8 项(24%)研究侧重于药品、疫苗和设备,4 项(12%)研究侧重于公共卫生方案。干预措施主要是预防性质的,主要针对传染病(19 项;56%)和母婴健康(6 项;18%)。根据具体情况、观点、干预措施类型和疾病状况,成本效益比差异很大,从节省成本到每挽救一条生命超过 37313 美元不等。尽管纳入研究的整体质量被判断为中等(满足 CHEERS 清单的 69%),但只有 27 项成本效益研究中有 4 项描述了异质性。埃塞俄比亚需要建立本地技术能力,以加强卫生经济评估的设计、实施和报告。