OBJECTIVES : The purposes of this study was to identify the existing literatures that used cost-consequence analysis (CCA) to conduct economic evaluations in pharmacoeconomics and to assess the quality of the studies.

METHODS : “Cost-consequence analysis” was searched on PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase databases from database inception to October 2017. The inclusion criteria included economic evaluations using CCA, full text and in English. The exclusion criteria were reviews, protocol, non-pharmacological, etc. Two rounds of screening and data extraction were conducted, followed by a bibliometric analysis and quality assessment, using 9 selected items in the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS : A total of 306 articles were identified and 49 articles were included. Only two articles were published before 2004. The majority of CCA publications have originated from Canada, Europe, and the United States, and were published in a wide variety of journals. The included studies mainly used the payers’ perspective (N=28, 57.1%). Nearly half (N = 23, 46.9%) of studies evaluated pharmaceuticals, followed by behavioral interventions (N= 16, 32.7%) and medical devices and consumables (N= 10, 20.4%). In terms of quality assessment, 12.2% (N= 6) studies met all 9 selected items in CHEERS. Most studies (N= 27, 55.2%) performed poorly with respect to discounting costs and/or outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS : CCA is a relatively less frequently used health economic evaluation method but appears to be increasingly significant in application of non-drug evaluations. However, the quality of CCA studies is generally poor. Pharmacoeconomics guidelines are suggested to be developed for better decision-making.