PE Guidelines logo
Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines Around The World

Country/Region: Colombia

PE Guidelines
Manual para la elaboración de evaluaciones económicas en salud
http://www.iets.org.co/Manuales/Manuales/Manual%20evaluacio%CC%81n%20econo%CC%81mica%20web%2030%20sep.pdf

PE Guidelines Source:
Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) (Institute of Health Technology Assessment)

Additional Information:
Methodology Guidelines for Conducting Economic Evaluations in the Framework of Clinical Practice Guidelines (Colciencia 2014):
http://gpc.minsalud.gov.co/recursos/Documents/Guia_Metodologica_Actualizacio%CC%81n_Economica_2014.pdf

IETS Methods on the Participatory Process (IETS 2014)
http://www.iets.org.co/Manuales/Manuales/Manual%20Participacio%CC%81n%2030%20sep.pdf

Technical Documents for the construction of the Reference Case for Health Economic Evaluation in Colombia (IETS 2014) (in English)
http://www.iets.org.co/Manuales/Manuales/Documentos%20tecnicos%20en%20ingl%C3%A9s.pdf

Last Webpage Update: Monday, January 15, 2018

PE Guidelines Key Features:

Key Features:  
Title and year of the documentManual para la elaboración de evaluaciones económicas en salud (2014) Guidelines for the Development of Health Economic Evaluations 
Affiliation of authorsInstituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud (IETS) Institute of Health Technology Assessment (IETS) 
Purpose of the documentThe purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance on the methods for the economic evaluation of health care technologies in Colombia, especially as it relates to informing coverage and financing decisions for the Colombian Obligatory Health Care Plan. It describes key principles, preferred data sources and reporting recommendations for all organizations developing an economic evaluation in Colombia. It aims to reduce variability in methods and data sources to enhance reproducibility and transparency. 
Standard reporting format includedYes (included on page 8-9). 
DisclosureYes.  
Target audience of funding/ author's interestsDecision makers, researchers, universities, pharmaceutical industry. 
PerspectiveThe health care system perspective.  
IndicationOnly indications approved in Colombia by the relevant authority, the National Institute of Drug and Food Monitoring (INVIMA). 
Target populationIt must be clearly stated, as well as outcomes related to each relevant subgroup, if necessary. It must also be discussed with relevant stakeholders, such as methodological and clinical experts, patients and caregivers, health professionals, relevant scientific associations and others, as indicated in the "IETS Methods on the Participatory Process". 
Subgroup analysisYes 
Choice of comparatorAll relevant comparators must be identified as used in common practice in Colombia. The comparators must be discussed with and justified by relevant stakeholders, such as clinical experts as well as regulatory authorities. 
Time horizonIt must be sufficiently long to reflect all important differences in costs or outcomes between the technologies being compared (more details available on p.15). 
Assumptions requiredYes. They must be clearly reported and explained. 
Preferred analytical techniqueCost-Utility Analysis, (CUA). 
Costs to be includedDirect costs for the health care system should be considered. Indirect costs and direct non-medical costs should be excluded, such as productivity and other costs assumed by patients on the base case (more details available on p.15). 
Source of costsOfficial databases and Colombian tariff manuals. If necessary, cost information can be requested from insurers and providers (more details available on p.21-23). 
ModelingYes. All assumptions must be clearly stated and discussed with relevant stakeholders (more details available on p. 24). 
Systematic review of evidencesYes. The source for each parameter of the model must be clearly stated. 
Preference for effectiveness over efficacyYes. 
Preferred outcome measureQALY. 
Preferred method to derive utilityEQ-5D using tariffs from a Latin American sample of the USA valuation study. 
Equity issues statedThe QALY has the same weight. 
Discounting costsBase: 5%; SA: 0 - 12%  
Discounting outcomesBase: 5%; SA: 0 - 12% 
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and rangeOne-way sensitivity analysis for the effectiveness and unit cost of the intervention, utility weights and discount rate. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis to assess overall uncertainty. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves and scatterplot to present results. 
Sensitivity analysis-methodsDeterministic Sensitivity Analysis and Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis. 
Presenting resultsYes. Using standard reporting format is recommended (as presented on p.27). 
Incremental analysisYes. 
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio)No. 
Portability of results (Generalizability)No. 
Financial impact analysisIt is not required for the base case analysis. If a budget impact analysis is required, there are separate guidelines, available at http://www.iets.org.co/manuales. 
Mandatory or recommended or voluntaryRecommended. 

Acknowledgement: Aurelio Mejía, MSc, Deputy Director of Health Technology Assessment, Institute of Health Technology Assessment, Bogota, Colombia & Mabel Moreno, MS, Senior Economist, Institute of Health Technology Assessment, Bogota, Colombia contributed to the key feature form.

Country Selection Page | PE Guidelines Index Page