School of Population and Public Health, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Public Health Department, Aix- Marseille-University, Marseille, France.
BMJ Glob Health. 2022 Aug;7(8). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-009777.
Productivity loss may contribute to a large proportion of costs of health conditions in an economic evaluation from a societal perspective, but there is currently a lack of methodological consensus on how productivity loss should be measured and valued. Despite the research progress surrounding this issue in other countries, it has been rarely discussed in China.
We reviewed the official guidelines on economic evaluations in different countries and regions and screened the literature to summarise the extent to which productivity loss was incorporated in economic evaluations and the underlying methodological challenges.
A total of 48 guidelines from 46 countries/regions were included. Although 32 (67%) guidelines recommend excluding productivity loss in the base case analysis, 23 (48%) guidelines recommend including productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses. Through a review of systematic reviews and the economic evaluation studies included in these reviews, we found that the average probability of incorporating productivity loss in an economic evaluation was 10.2%. Among the economic evaluations (n=478) that explicitly considered productivity loss, most (n=455) considered losses from paid work, while only a few studies (n=23) considered unpaid work losses. Recognising the existing methodological challenges and the specific context of China, we proposed a practical research agenda and a disease list for progress on this topic, including the development of the disease list comprehensively consisting of health conditions where the productivity loss should be incorporated into economic evaluations.
An increasing number of guidelines recommend the inclusion of productivity loss in the base case or additional analyses of economic evaluation. We optimistically expect that more Chinese researchers notice the importance of incorporating productivity loss in economic evaluations and anticipate guidelines that may be suitable for Chinese practitioners and decision-makers that facilitate the advancement of research on productivity loss measurement and valuation.
从社会角度对健康状况进行经济评估时,生产力损失可能会导致很大一部分成本,但是目前在如何衡量和评估生产力损失方面缺乏方法学共识。尽管其他国家在这一问题的研究方面已经取得了进展,但在中国却很少讨论。
我们回顾了不同国家和地区的经济评估官方指南,并筛选了文献,以总结生产力损失在经济评估中纳入的程度以及潜在的方法学挑战。
共纳入 46 个国家/地区的 48 条指南。尽管 32 条(67%)指南建议在基本情况分析中排除生产力损失,但 23 条(48%)指南建议在基本情况或额外分析中纳入生产力损失。通过对系统评价和这些评价中包含的经济评价研究的回顾,我们发现纳入经济评价中考虑生产力损失的平均概率为 10.2%。在明确考虑生产力损失的经济评价(n=478)中,大多数(n=455)考虑了有偿工作的损失,而只有少数研究(n=23)考虑了无偿工作的损失。认识到现有的方法学挑战和中国的具体情况,我们提出了一个实用的研究议程和一个疾病清单,以推进这一主题的研究,包括全面制定应将生产力损失纳入经济评估的疾病清单。
越来越多的指南建议将生产力损失纳入经济评估的基本情况或额外分析中。我们乐观地期望,越来越多的中国研究人员会意识到在经济评估中纳入生产力损失的重要性,并期望可能适合中国从业者和决策者的指南能够促进生产力损失衡量和估值研究的进展。