Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines: Egypt

Country/Region: Egypt
PE Guidelines

Guidelines for Reporting Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations (8/28/2013)

PE Guidelines Source:
Egyptian Ministry of Health, Egyptian Drug Authority
Additional Information:
Isisi G, Kaló Z, Eldessouki R, et al. Recommendations for Reporting Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations in Egypt.
Value in Health Regional Issues 2013; 2: 319-327.

Information current as of Monday, June 13, 2022

Key Features

Type of Guidelines PE Guidelines
Title and year of the document Guidelines for reporting pharmacoeconomic evaluations in Egypt (2013)
Affiliation of authors Pharmacoeconomic Unit, Central Administration for Pharmaceutical Affairs
Purpose of the document Provide a scientific guidance to conduct and report a PE study
Standard reporting format included yes
Disclosure yes
Target audience of funding/ author's interests Public and private payers, healthcare industries and clinicians
Perspective It should be relevant to the research question and adapted to benefits gained by the health care system.
Indication It should be used in the approved Indications.
Target population Both those who are insured and uninsured by the Egyptian health care system.
Subgroup analysis Only for those whom clinical and cost effectiveness may be expected to differ from that of the overall population.
Choice of comparator Comparators should be policy relevant. The widely used and reimbursed health care technology for a given patient group is the preferred option.
Time horizon It should be ensured that the chosen outcome and the resource consumption of the treatment alternatives are observable in this period.
Assumptions required yes
Preferred analytical technique Any of CMA, CEA and CUA considered.
Costs to be included Direct medical costs as well as additional costs, savings or other benefits when data are available.
Source of costs Primary data collection; if unavailable, secondary data sources can be used such as local administration, accounting data patient chart review. Official sources of unit cost data for products (e.g. tender lists) are preferable.
Modeling Modeling options include decision trees and Markov models. The model should be described in detail and should correspond to real practice of patient management.
Systematic review of evidences yes
Preference for effectiveness over efficacy yes
Preferred outcome measure Primary outcome measures are the first choice. In CEA, where intermediate marker is chosen, must have a validated, well established link with an important hard-end point. In CUA, outcomes are measured in QALY gained.
Preferred method to derive utility The direct use of EQ-5D, SF-6D or similar generic measures is recommended.
Equity issues stated All lives, life years, or QALYs should be valued equally, regardless of age, gender, or socioeconomic status of individuals in the population.
Discounting costs A discount rate of 3.5 % per year should be used for costs and outcomes.
Discounting outcomes A discount rate of 3.5 % per year should be used for costs and outcomes.
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range Critical component(s) in the calculation should be varied through a relevant range or from worst case to best case.
Sensitivity analysis-methods DSA should be required, whilst PSA remains optional.
Presenting results Total costs and health outcomes must be reported separately, and the aggregated result be explained.The probability that the intervention is cost-effective at a range of threshold values should be reported and displayed graphically.
Incremental analysis ICER has to be calculated.
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio) yes
Portability of results (Generalizability) The generalizability and extent to which the clinical efficacy data and the economic data are representative should be identified and discussed.
Financial impact analysis Not required but recommended when data is available
Mandatory or recommended or voluntary Recommended in the mean time but expected to be mandatory in few years


Gihan Elsisi MSc, PhD(c), Head of Pharmacoeconomic Unit, Central Administration for Pharmaceutical Affairs, MOHP; Randa Eldessouki MBBCH, MSc, MD, Director of Scientific Initiatives, ISPOR; Mahmoud Elmahdawy Pharm D, Manager of Hospital Pharmacy Administration, Central Administration for Pharmaceutical Affairs, MOHP
Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on Update my browser now