Pharmacoeconomic Guidelines: Malaysia
Country/Region: Malaysia

PE Guidelines
Pharmacoeconomic Guideline For Malaysia (March 2012)
Pdf in English
Pdf in English
PE Guidelines Source:
Ministry of Health of Malaysia
Information current as of Thursday, April 28, 2016
Key Features
Key Features | |
---|---|
Type of Guidelines | PE Guidelines |
Title and year of the document | Pharmacoeconomic Guideline For Malaysia 2012 |
Affiliation of authors | PSD, MOH, MaHTAS, MySPOR, MPS,MUSC,UM,UKM,UKMMC, USM, UNU-IIGH, UiTM |
Purpose of the document | A methodological guide to conduct pharmacoeconomic analysis in Malaysia. |
Standard reporting format included | Yes |
Disclosure | Yes |
Target audience of funding/ author's interests | Both public and private payers, healthcare industries, clinicians, and research communities, accordingly. |
Perspective | Provider or funder. Patient and societal perspective are encouraged |
Indication | Indication(s) must be approved by DCA/reference country |
Target population | Must be clearly stated. |
Subgroup analysis | Yes, can be included when appropriate |
Choice of comparator | To be compared against the most relevant alternatives for the proposed indication in the applied setting. Comparator(s) should not be a placebo but non-drug therapy can be used. The choice of comparator(s) should always be justified. |
Time horizon | Should be long enough to capture all changes in cost(s) and outcome(s) of the intervention. |
Assumptions required | Yes. Should be clearly stated. |
Preferred analytical technique | CEA and CUA. Technique chosen should be justified clearly. |
Costs to be included | All costs relevant to the chosen perspective (provider/funder). Societal cost is preferred in any analysis. |
Source of costs | Local cost data in the applied setting. The source of cost data must be identified. |
Modeling | Yes. Clearly detailed with maximum transparency. All assumptions should be explicitly stated. |
Systematic review of evidences | Yes. Meta-analysis is encouraged. |
Preference for effectiveness over efficacy | N/A |
Preferred outcome measure | Should justify the selection. |
Preferred method to derive utility | Should justify the selection. |
Equity issues stated | N/A |
Discounting costs | 3% (Sensitivity Analysis, 0 and 5%) |
Discounting outcomes | 3% (Sensitivity Analysis, 0 and 5%) |
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range | All key uncertain parameters. Best and worst case scenario presented. |
Sensitivity analysis-methods | One-way, multivariate analysis as deemed appropriate. |
Presenting results | Aggregated and disaggregated form for cost(s) and outcome(s). |
Incremental analysis | Yes |
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio) | Yes |
Portability of results (Generalizability) | N/A |
Financial impact analysis | Yes |
Mandatory or recommended or voluntary | Voluntary for 2 years upon launch of the pharmacoeconomic guideline and mandatory thereafter. |
Acknowledgement: