Suppr超能文献

COVID-19 干预措施的经济评价系统综述:考虑非健康影响和分配问题。

A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations of COVID-19 Interventions: Considerations of Non-Health Impacts and Distributional Issues.

机构信息

Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.

Center for the Evaluation of Value and Risk in Health, Institute for Clinical Research and Health Policy Studies, Tufts Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.

出版信息

Value Health. 2022 Aug;25(8):1298-1306. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2022.02.003. Epub 2022 Apr 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to conduct a systematic review of economic evaluations of COVID-19 interventions and to examine whether and how these studies incorporate non-health impacts and distributional concerns.

METHODS

We searched the National Institutes of Health's COVID-19 Portfolio as of May 20, 2021, and supplemented our search with additional sources. We included original articles, including preprints, evaluating both the health and economic effects of a COVID-19-related intervention. Using a pre-specified data collection form, 2 reviewers independently screened, reviewed, and extracted information about the study characteristics, intervention types, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs). We used an Impact Inventory to catalog the types of non-health impacts considered.

RESULTS

We included 70 articles, almost half of which were preprints. Most articles (56%) included at least one non-health impact, but fewer (21%) incorporated non-economic consequences. Few articles (17%) examined subgroups of interest. After excluding negative ICERs, the median ICER for the entire sample (n = 243 ratios) was $67,000/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) (interquartile range [IQR] $9000-$893,000/QALY). Interventions including a pharmaceutical component yielded a median ICER of $93,000/QALY (IQR $4000-$7,809,000/QALY), whereas interventions including a non-pharmaceutical component were slightly more cost-effective overall with a median ICER of $81,000/QALY (IQR $12,000-$1,034,000/QALY). Interventions reported to be highly cost-effective were treatment, public information campaigns, quarantining identified contacts/cases, canceling public events, and social distancing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review highlights the lack of consideration of non-health and distributional impacts among COVID-19-related economic evaluations. Accounting for non-health impacts and distributional effects is essential for comprehensive assessment of interventions' value and imperative for generating cost-effectiveness evidence for both current and future pandemics.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在对 COVID-19 干预措施的经济评估进行系统综述,并考察这些研究是否以及如何纳入非健康影响和分配问题。

方法

截至 2021 年 5 月 20 日,我们检索了美国国立卫生研究院的 COVID-19 投资组合,并通过其他来源进行了补充。我们纳入了评估 COVID-19 相关干预措施的健康和经济效果的原始文章,包括预印本。使用预先指定的数据收集表,2 名审查员独立筛选、审查和提取了有关研究特征、干预类型和增量成本效益比(ICER)的信息。我们使用影响清单来分类考虑的非健康影响类型。

结果

我们纳入了 70 篇文章,其中近一半是预印本。大多数文章(56%)至少纳入了一种非健康影响,但纳入非经济后果的文章较少(21%)。很少有文章(17%)检查了感兴趣的亚组。排除负 ICER 后,整个样本(n=243 个比值)的中位数 ICER 为 67000 美元/质量调整生命年(QALY)(四分位距 [IQR] 9000-893000 美元/QALY)。包括制药成分的干预措施的中位数 ICER 为 93000 美元/QALY(IQR 4000-7809000 美元/QALY),而总体上包括非制药成分的干预措施更具成本效益,中位数 ICER 为 81000 美元/QALY(IQR 12000-1034000 美元/QALY)。报告为高度有效的干预措施包括治疗、公共信息运动、隔离已识别的接触者/病例、取消公共活动和保持社交距离。

结论

我们的综述强调了 COVID-19 相关经济评估中缺乏对非健康和分配影响的考虑。考虑非健康影响和分配效应对于全面评估干预措施的价值至关重要,对于为当前和未来的大流行生成成本效益证据也是必要的。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/984c/8986127/0e1376297756/gr1_lrg.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验