Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (194)
- Conference Proceeding/Conference Report (125)
- Part of a Book (70)
- Lecture/Speech (54)
- Book (52)
- Bachelor Thesis (12)
- Doctoral Thesis (4)
- Master's Thesis (4)
- Working Paper (2)
- Editorship Editorial Board (1)
Language
- English (298)
- German (219)
- Multiple languages (1)
- Spanish (1)
Keywords
- Psychology (32)
- Coaching (15)
- Healthcare (11)
- Cloud Computing (10)
- Personalentwicklung (9)
- Personalmanagement (9)
- Physics (9)
- Digitalisierung (8)
- Gesundheitsökonomie (8)
- Psychologie (8)
Economic analysis based on multinational studies: methods for adapting findings to national contexts
(2010)
Background: Health economic parameters are increasingly considered as variables in health care decisions, but decision makers are interested in country-specific evaluations. However, a large number of studies are performed in foreign countries or in a multinational setting, which limits the transferability to a single nation’s context.
Objective: The present analysis summarises several of the most common international methods for generating health economic analyses based on clinical studies from different settings.
Methods: A narrative literature review was performed to identify potential reasons for limited transferability of health economic evaluation results from one country to another. Based on these results, we searched the methodological literature for analytic approaches to handle the restrictions. Additionally we describe the possibility of transferring foreign economic study results to the country of interest by matching trial data with routine data of national databases.
Results: The main factors for limited transferability of health economic findings were found in country-specific differences in resource consumption and the resulting costs. These differences are affected by a number of influencing cofactors (demography, epidemiology and individual patient’s factors) and the overall health care system structures (e.g. payment systems, health provider incentives). However, despite the limitations country-specific health economic assessments could be realised using the pooled/split analyses approach, some statistical approaches and modelling approaches.
Conclusion: A variety of methods for identifying and adjusting country-specific differences in costs, effects and cost-effectiveness was established during the past decades. Multinational studies will continue to play a crucial role in the evaluation of cost-effectiveness at national levels. It seems likely that the growing interest in multinational studies will lead to continued developments in adaptation methods.
For patients with an acute exacerbation of chronic liver failure (ACLF), the molecular adsorbent recirculating system (MARS) can result in a prolongation of life, but data on costs and cost-effectiveness are lacking. A health economic evaluation of a prospective controlled cohort trial in patients with ACLF not eligible for liver transplantation with 3 years follow-up and consecutive modelling of long-term costs, outcomes and cost-effectiveness was conducted. Costs were calculated from the perspective of the German health-care system. One hundred and forty-nine patients with ACLF were included of which 67 (44.9%) were treated with MARS and 82 (55.1%) assigned to the control group. Mean survival was 692 days in MARS-treated patients (33% survival after 3 years) and 453 days in control patients (15% after 3 years, logrank P = 0.022). MARS patients gained 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI): -0.12 to 1.46] life years (LYs), determined by the bootstrap method. The mean cost difference was 19.835 euro (95% CI: 13.308-25.429) with 35639 euro for MARS-treated patients and 15804 euro for controls. Incremental costs per LY gained were 29.985 euro (95% CI: 9.441-321.761) and 43.040 euro (95% CI: 13.551-461.856) per quality-adjusted LY gained. There is an acceptable cost-effectiveness of MARS, compared with other medical technologies presently reimbursed. Randomized controlled trials with sufficient sample size are necessary before a final recommendation for MARS can be given.
Objectives: To develop and psychometrically evaluate a domain-specific questionnaire to assess subtle but clinically relevant differences in treatment experiences and satisfaction over a wide range of currently available insulin therapy regimens. The study focussed on patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and placed particular attention on the impact of different forms of insulin therapy on diabetes self-management. Methods: The development of the Insulin Treatment Experience Questionnaire (ITEQ) was conducted in three steps: (i) a qualitative phase to generate relevant items and identify relevant domains; (ii) a pilot study to reduce the number of generated items; and (iii) a validation study to assess major psychometric properties of the final ITEQ version. Results: The final version of the questionnaire comprised 28 items with the subscales ‘leisure activities’ (four items), ‘psychological barriers’ (two items), ‘handling’ (five items), ‘diabetes control’ (six items), ‘dependence’ (five items), ‘weight control’ (three items), ‘sleep’ (two items), and one further item assessing general treatment satisfaction. The subscales’ internal consistencies (Cronbach’s alpha) ranged from 0.52 to 0.83. Motivated by the homogenous structure of inter-scale-correlations (range 0.10–0.46), a summary composite score was calculated (alpha = 0.86). Construct validity showed statistically significant correlations with other scales (ITEQ vs the Problem Areas in Diabetes [PAID] questionnaire total score −0.60, ITEQ vs the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire [DTSQ] total score 0.52). Conclusion: The newly developed ITEQ displayed satisfactory to good psychometric properties, thereby allowing the assessment of everyday life experience and treatment satisfaction in patients with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Additional research is needed to assess test-retest reliability and sensitivity to change.