Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines: Ireland
Country/Region: Ireland
PE Guidelines
PE Guidelines Source:
Health Information and Quality Authority https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2019-07/HTA-Economic-Guidelines-2019.pdf
The National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics http://www.ncpe.ie/submission-process/hta-guidelines/
The National Centre for Pharmacoeconomics http://www.ncpe.ie/submission-process/hta-guidelines/
Additional Information:
Guidance on Budget Impact Analysis of Health Technologies in Ireland (2018)
https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2018-01/HIQA_BIA_Guidelines_2018_0.pdf
Guidelines for the Retrieval and Interpretation of Economic Evaluations of Health Technologies in Ireland (2014)
https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2017-01/Guidelines-Retrieval-and-Interpretation-of-Econ-Lit.pdf
Guidelines for Stakeholder Engagement in Health Technology Assessment in Ireland (2014)
https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2017-01/HTA-Guidelines-Stakeholder-Engagement.pdf
Guidelines for Evaluating the Clinical Effectiveness of Health Technologies in Ireland (2017)
https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2017-01/Clinical-Effectiveness-Guidelines.pdf
Information current as of Tuesday, January 21, 2020
Key Features
| Key Features | |
|---|---|
| Type of Guidelines | PE Guidelines |
| Title and year of the document | Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies in Ireland (2019) |
| Affiliation of authors | Health Information and Quality Authority |
| Purpose of the document | To promote the production of health technology assessments that are timely, reliable, consistent and relevant to the needs of decision makers and key stakeholders |
| Standard reporting format included | No, however the guidelines specify a reference case for use in the primary analysis |
| Disclosure | N/A |
| Target audience of funding/ author's interests | All those conducting economic evaluations in Ireland, to include health technology suppliers preparing applications for reimbursement and as a reference source for those using economic evaluations to inform decision making |
| Perspective | For the reference case, the perspective on costs should be the publicly-funded health and social care system while the perspective on outcomes should include all health benefits accruing to individuals |
| Indication | Clearly state the specific application (e.g., purpose, place and context) that is being explored. |
| Target population | Should be clearly defined - parameters include baseline demographic characteristics, disease characteristics, treatment setting, or in the context of past treatment. |
| Subgroup analysis | Yes - ideally identified a priori based on plausible biological and clinical rationale for subgroup effect |
| Choice of comparator | Recommended standard of care and those used in routine clinical practice |
| Time horizon | The time horizon should be of sufficient duration to capture any meaningful differences in the future costs and outcomes likely to accrue to the competing technologies |
| Assumptions required | Yes - clearly identify and justify all assumptions |
| Preferred analytical technique | For the reference case, the preferred evaluation type is a cost-utility analysis |
| Costs to be included | For the reference case, only direct costs relevant to the publicly-funded health and social care system should be included |
| Source of costs | Varied - costs used should be relevant to the publicly-funded health and social care system, should be the most recently available with the cost year specified and all sources clearly identified. |
| Modeling | Yes - model should be clearly described with all inputs and assumptions documented and justified. |
| Systematic review of evidences | Evidence to support the effectiveness should be derived by systematic review of all high calibre, relevant data. |
| Preference for effectiveness over efficacy | For the reference case, evidence to support the effectiveness of the technology should be derived by systematic review of all high-calibre, relevant data. |
| Preferred outcome measure | Health effects should be expressed as QALYs with changes in quantity and quality of life reported separately along with a clear explanation of how the measures were combined and the assumptions made |
| Preferred method to derive utility | The use of indirect preference-based methods such as the EQ-5D or SD-6D is recommended. Information on changes in health state should be patient-derived with preferences elicited from a clearly described relevant population. Direct HRQoL methods may be used provided they have been gathered in a relevant population |
| Equity issues stated | For the reference case, additional QALYs gained should be assumed to be of equal value, regardless of any considerations for specific characteristics of the population |
| Discounting costs | 4% (Univariate sensitivity analysis 0-10%, 3-5%) |
| Discounting outcomes | 4% (Univariate sensitivity analysis 0-10%, 3-5%) |
| Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range | The effects of parameter uncertainty and model uncertainty should be systematically evaluated using sensitivity analysis and scenario analyses for the range of plausible scenarios. The range of values for each parameter should be clearly stated and justified. |
| Sensitivity analysis-methods | Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis |
| Presenting results | Present in tabular format in both disaggregated and aggregated forms. Uncertainty should be presented graphically and in tabular form to facilitate interpretation along with the probability that a technology is cost-effective at a range of threshold values. |
| Incremental analysis | Yes |
| Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio) | Yes |
| Portability of results (Generalizability) | The overall generalizability of the evaluation should be discussed in the context of the validity and relevance of the data to the Irish publicly-funded health and social care system |
| Financial impact analysis | A budget impact analysis should be submitted. See separate BIA guidelines: https://www.hiqa.ie/sites/default/files/2018-01/HIQA_BIA_Guidelines_2018_0.pdf |
| Mandatory or recommended or voluntary | Recommended |
Acknowledgement: