Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Clarice Pears Building, 90 Byres Rd, Glasgow, G12 8TB, UK.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Sep 30;22(1):134. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01220-9.
When clinically effective, cost-effective health interventions are not fully implemented in clinical practice, population health suffers. Economic factors are among the most commonly cited reasons for suboptimal implementation. Despite this, implementation and economic evaluation are not routinely performed in conjunction with one another. This review sought to identify and describe what methods are available for researchers to incorporate implementation within economic evaluation, how these methods differ, when they should be used, and where gaps remain.
We conducted a scoping review using systematic methods. A pearl-growing approach was used to identify studies. References and citations were identified using Web of Science and Scopus. We included for review any study that contained terms relating to economic evaluation and a series of implementation-related terms in the title or abstract. The search was conducted and validated using two independent researchers.
Our review identified 42 unique studies that included a methodology for combining implementation and economic evaluation. The methods identified could be categorized into four broad themes: (i) policy cost-effectiveness approach (11 studies), (ii) value of information and value of implementation approach (16 studies), (iii) mixed methods approach (6 studies), and (iv) costing approach (9 studies). We identified a trend over time from methods that adopted the policy cost-effectiveness approach to methods that considered the trade-off between the value of information and value of implementation. More recently, mixed methods approaches to incorporate economic evaluation and implementation have been developed, alongside methods to define, measure and cost individual components of the implementation process for use in economic evaluation.
Our review identified a range of methods currently available for researchers considering implementation alongside economic evaluation. There is no single method or tool that can incorporate all the relevant issues to fully incorporate implementation within an economic evaluation. Instead, there are a suite of tools available, each of which can be used to answer a specific question relating to implementation. Researchers, reimbursement agencies and national and local decision-makers need to consider how best to utilize these tools to improve implementation.
当临床有效的、具有成本效益的卫生干预措施在临床实践中没有得到充分实施时,人口健康就会受到影响。经济因素是导致实施效果不理想的最常见原因之一。尽管如此,实施和经济评估通常并没有同时进行。本综述旨在确定和描述研究人员将实施纳入经济评估的可用方法,这些方法的不同之处,何时应使用这些方法以及仍存在哪些差距。
我们采用系统方法进行了范围综述。采用珍珠增长方法来确定研究。参考文献和引文是使用 Web of Science 和 Scopus 确定的。我们综述的研究包括标题或摘要中包含与经济评估和一系列实施相关术语的任何研究。该搜索由两名独立研究人员进行和验证。
我们的综述确定了 42 项独特的研究,其中包括将实施与经济评估相结合的方法。确定的方法可以分为四个广泛的主题:(i)政策成本效益方法(11 项研究),(ii)信息价值和实施价值方法(16 项研究),(iii)混合方法(6 项研究)和(iv)成本核算方法(9 项研究)。我们发现,随着时间的推移,从采用政策成本效益方法的方法到考虑信息价值和实施价值之间权衡的方法的趋势。最近,已经开发了将经济评估和实施结合在一起的混合方法,以及用于定义、衡量和核算实施过程各个组成部分的方法,以用于经济评估。
我们的综述确定了目前研究人员在考虑实施与经济评估时可使用的一系列方法。没有单一的方法或工具可以将所有相关问题完全纳入经济评估中的实施。相反,有一系列可用的工具,每个工具都可以用于回答与实施相关的特定问题。研究人员、报销机构以及国家和地方决策者需要考虑如何最好地利用这些工具来改善实施。