A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic studies evaluating ophthalmic drugs
A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic studies evaluating ophthalmic drugs
Introduction: Innovative drugs have been approved in ophthalmology. Thus, the number and importance of economic evaluation studies of ophthalmic drugs have been growing. This study aims to assess the methodological quality of pharmacoeconomic studies of ophthalmic drugs.
Area Covered: A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed/Embase until November 2018 to identify full pharmacoeconomic studies evaluating ophthalmic drugs. The quality of studies was evaluated using the British Medical Journal (BMJ) checklist. Quality indicators were evaluated by Fisher's exact test. Ninety-five studies were included, 50 (52.6%) cost-utility analysis, 28 (29.5%) cost-effectiveness and 17 (17.9%) cost-effectiveness/cost-utility. All studies presented, at least, three methodological limitations. Cost-utility studies, studies conducted from a health system perspective, with time horizons longer than one-year and that rely on observational or observational and experimental data simultaneously are associated with higher quality. Only eight (8.4%) studies considered two eyes in the economic analysis and only 13 (13.7%) considered the natural history of the disease when extrapolating results for long-term analysis.
Expert Opinion: The majority of the pharmacoeconomic studies were assessed as having good methodological quality, however, the methodological quality scores were sensitive to several indicators. Therefore, improving the quality of studies would enhance their usefulness in the decision-making processes.
Administration, Ophthalmic, Checklist, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Decision Making, Drug Approval, Economics, Pharmaceutical, Eye Diseases/drug therapy, Humans, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Research Design
421-430
Ribeiro, Inês Souto
2fd1901b-61bd-4ad5-81b3-a3f8145ec144
Batel Marques, Francisco Jorge
d7155837-fe68-4b1a-ac26-53b1119d3276
Alves, Dalila Gil
8ba77398-e872-44d6-912b-ddbed1ea2a81
Alves, Carlos Miguel Costa
9b6918c5-70a2-4292-8340-5c8d490bebf4
4 July 2019
Ribeiro, Inês Souto
2fd1901b-61bd-4ad5-81b3-a3f8145ec144
Batel Marques, Francisco Jorge
d7155837-fe68-4b1a-ac26-53b1119d3276
Alves, Dalila Gil
8ba77398-e872-44d6-912b-ddbed1ea2a81
Alves, Carlos Miguel Costa
9b6918c5-70a2-4292-8340-5c8d490bebf4
Ribeiro, Inês Souto, Batel Marques, Francisco Jorge, Alves, Dalila Gil and Alves, Carlos Miguel Costa
(2019)
A systematic review of the methodological quality of economic studies evaluating ophthalmic drugs.
Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 19 (4), .
(doi:10.1080/14737167.2019.1579646).
Abstract
Introduction: Innovative drugs have been approved in ophthalmology. Thus, the number and importance of economic evaluation studies of ophthalmic drugs have been growing. This study aims to assess the methodological quality of pharmacoeconomic studies of ophthalmic drugs.
Area Covered: A systematic search was conducted in Pubmed/Embase until November 2018 to identify full pharmacoeconomic studies evaluating ophthalmic drugs. The quality of studies was evaluated using the British Medical Journal (BMJ) checklist. Quality indicators were evaluated by Fisher's exact test. Ninety-five studies were included, 50 (52.6%) cost-utility analysis, 28 (29.5%) cost-effectiveness and 17 (17.9%) cost-effectiveness/cost-utility. All studies presented, at least, three methodological limitations. Cost-utility studies, studies conducted from a health system perspective, with time horizons longer than one-year and that rely on observational or observational and experimental data simultaneously are associated with higher quality. Only eight (8.4%) studies considered two eyes in the economic analysis and only 13 (13.7%) considered the natural history of the disease when extrapolating results for long-term analysis.
Expert Opinion: The majority of the pharmacoeconomic studies were assessed as having good methodological quality, however, the methodological quality scores were sensitive to several indicators. Therefore, improving the quality of studies would enhance their usefulness in the decision-making processes.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 4 February 2019
Published date: 4 July 2019
Keywords:
Administration, Ophthalmic, Checklist, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Decision Making, Drug Approval, Economics, Pharmaceutical, Eye Diseases/drug therapy, Humans, Quality Indicators, Health Care, Research Design
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 474703
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/474703
ISSN: 1473-7167
PURE UUID: 5e5e11c4-1a6e-45c6-afca-aa0bbc2fc62a
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 01 Mar 2023 18:00
Last modified: 17 Mar 2024 04:01
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
Francisco Jorge Batel Marques
Author:
Dalila Gil Alves
Author:
Carlos Miguel Costa Alves
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics
