EVALUATION OF QUALITY OF PHARMACOECONOMIC STUDIES IN ASIA PACIFIC AND IDENTIFICATION OF INFLUENCING VARIABLES

Author(s)

Pandey R, Pandey P, Shrivastav V, Mittra S, Shah V
SIRO Clinpharm Pvt Ltd, Maharashtra, India

OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality and identify different variables influencing quality of pharmacoeconomic studies published in Asia pacific (APAC), from 2006-2016. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on MEDLINE and Cochrane using different search terms for cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, and cost-benefit analyses. Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was used for quality assessment. Descriptive statistics was applied to analyse the number of studies in QHES quality quartiles. Logistic regression was performed to evaluate the association of factors (funding, quality of journal, training of authors, per-capita healthcare expenditure, and out-of-pocket expense on health) with high quality (HQ, QHES ≥75) scores. RESULTS: Of 262 retrieved studies, 128 were found relevant and evaluated. The mean (SD) QHES score was 67.4 (1.35). Distribution of studies in each quality quartile was: High (n=59 [46.09%]); Fair (n=50 [39.06%]); Poor (n=19 [14.83%]). Majority of studies (n=80 [62.5%]) were conducted in Japan and Australia. A total of 19 (14.8%) HQ studies and 32 (25%) studies from other three quartiles either did not receive or disclose the funding. Only 11 (18.64%) HQ studies were published in speciality journals (specific to public health or healtheconomics) and 4 (6.78%) in Asian journals. Primary authors who had relevant training in public health, or healtheconomics were associated with higher number of HQ studies (n=51, 86.44%). Training of primary authors was significantly associated with HQ studies (OR: 7.1; 95% CI: 2.9, 19.23). Impact factor of journal, per-capita expenditure on healthcare, and out-of-pocket expense on health did not show significant association with HQ scores. CONCLUSIONS: High-quality pharmacoeconomic research is confined to only few countries of APAC; it can be improved by advance training of authors in public health or healtheconomics. Also, greater interest of various stakeholders in funding the pharmacoeconomic research and introduction of speciality journals in APAC are warranted.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2016-09, ISPOR Asia Pacific 2016, Singapore

Value in Health, Vol. 19, No. 7 (November 2016)

Code

PRM2

Topic

Clinical Outcomes

Topic Subcategory

Clinical Outcomes Assessment

Disease

Multiple Diseases

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

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

×