PE Guidelines logo
Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines Around The World

Country/Region: Sweden

PE Guidelines
General guidelines for economic evaluations from The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (updated 2017)
PDF in Swedish
or clicking from https://tlv.se/verktygsmeny/om-tlv/regelverk/allmanna-rad.html

PE Guidelines Source:
The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV)
www.tlv.se

Additional Information:
Assessment of Methods in Health Care, The Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services. August 2017.
www.sbu.se/handbook (English version, SBU’s handbook)
http://www.sbu.se/upload/ebm/metodbok/SBUsHandbok.pdf (Swedish version, SBU’s Handbook)

The Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU)
www.sbu.se

Last Webpage Update: Friday, April 20, 2018

PE Guidelines Key Features:

Key Features:  
Title and year of the documentÄndring i Tandvårds- och läkemedelsförmånsverkets allmänna råd (TLVAR 2003:2) om ekonomiska utvärderingar (2017) 
Affiliation of authorsThe Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV)  
Purpose of the documentGuidelines for the economic evaluations for submissions to TLV.  
Standard reporting format includedNo 
DisclosureYes 
Target audience of funding/ author's interestsPharmaceutical companies. The Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (TLV)  
PerspectiveSocietal 
IndicationYes 
Target populationYes 
Subgroup analysisYes, where the treatment can be expected to differ in cost efficiency (for instance gender, age, severity, risk level)  
Choice of comparatorThe most cost efficient of the available and clinically relevant treatment options in Sweden  
Time horizonShall cover the period when the main health effects and costs arise. 
Assumptions requiredNot stated 
Preferred analytical techniqueCUA, CEA, CMA  
Costs to be includedAll relevant costs. Production loss estimated by human capital approach 
Source of costsTLV.se for drugs  
ModelingYes, requires details 
Systematic review of evidencesNot stated 
Preference for effectiveness over efficacyNot stated 
Preferred outcome measureQALY. WTP in some special circumstances.  
Preferred method to derive utilityStandard gamble, time trade-off, EQ-5D. Prefer weights from ill-person. 
Equity issues statedNot stated 
Discounting costsBase:3%; SA:0~5%; 3% 
Discounting outcomesBase:3%; SA:0~5%; 0% 
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and rangeAt central assumptions and parameters 
Sensitivity analysis-methodsNot specific 
Presenting resultsMethods, assumptions made and detailed data shall be shown clearly that the different steps in the analysis are easily followed. 
Incremental analysisYes 
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio)Not specific 
Portability of results (Generalizability)Yes, under modeling analysis 
Financial impact analysisNo 
Mandatory or recommended or voluntary 

Acknowledgement: Sophie Werkö, PhD, MSc, Project Director, Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU) and Vice Chair, International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), Stockholm, Sweden contributed to the key feature form.

Country Selection Page | PE Guidelines Index Page