Search

Objective: To assess the impact of the 1997 Canadian guidelines on the methods and presentation of economic evaluations conducted from a Canadian perspective in the published literature., Methods: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify health technology economic evaluations conducted from a Canadian perspective published in peer-reviewed journals between 2001 and 2006. To investigate the impact of the 1997 Canadian Coordinating Office of Health Technology Assessment guidelines, each included study was assessed against 17 of the 25 recommendations., Results: Of the 153 included studies, a base set of 9 methodological standards, as outlined by the 1997 guidelines, were followed by over 50% of the studies including: indications, outcomes for cost utility analysis, outcomes for cost benefit analysis, discounting future cost and outcomes, cost identification and valuation, evaluating uncertainty and disclosing funding relationships. Main divergences from the guidelines were found for analytic technique (38%), study perspective (23%), source of preferences (8%), equity (7%), and cost measurement (24%)., Conclusion: The current assessment has shown that the 1997 Canadian guidelines have set a minimum methodological standard within the community of "doers" conducting economic analyses from a Canadian perspective. Although there was divergence from some of the recommendations, the majority were reflected as changes in the 2006 Canadian guidelines.

In Canada, 74,255 deaths (33% of all deaths) in 2003 were due to cardio-vascular disease (CVD). As one of the most costly diseases, CVD represents a major economic burden on health care systems. The purpose of the present study was to review the literature on the economic costs of CVD in Canada and other developed countries (United States, Europe and Australia) published from 1998 to 2006, with a focus on Canada. Of 1656 screened titles and abstracts, 34 articles were reviewed including six Canadian studies and 17 American studies. While considerable variation was observed among studies, all studies indicated that the costs of treating CVD-related conditions are significant, outlining a convincing case for CVD prevention programs.

Economic evaluations involve the comparison of alternative courses of action in terms of both their costs and their consequences. In response to increasing health care costs, economic evaluations of competing technologies, including radiologic interventions, are increasingly used to inform resource allocation decisions. It is therefore crucial that radiologists have a thorough understanding of the methods. The objective of this paper is to present a detailed overview of the principles and methods of economic evaluations of health technologies, including recent methodologic developments. For the purpose of this paper, the key elements of an economic evaluation are divided into 5 broad sections: 1) types of economic evaluations (eg, cost-effectiveness analysis, cost-utility analysis), 2) study perspectives (ie, temporal and cost perspectives), 3) analysis of costs and effects (eg, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, cost-effectiveness planes), 4) conducting economic evaluations alongside trials or using decision-analytic models, and 5) dealing with the different forms of uncertainty in economic evaluations (eg, sampling uncertainty in trials, parameter uncertainty in models). Examples from the recent radiology literature are used to explain the key concepts. This review improves upon the previous educational papers published in radiologic journals, as it covers recent methodologic advances regarding the treatment of uncertainty.

Health technology assessment has significantly improved the decision-making process via the thorough and systematic evaluation of the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of new drugs and health technologies. However, the device industry faces a significant challenge in meeting the evidentiary demands of the health technology assessment process, particularly given the small size of the Canadian market and device manufacturers. This is further compounded by the somewhat short-sighted nature of health care budgets, which see medical devices as a cost-driver given the sometimes significant upfront investment required to implement a technology producing downstream benefits in the long-term. Industry is the research and development of the health care system, but innovative development could be stifled unless the health technology assessment process recognizes the risk of manufacturers. The authors propose that health technology assessment can be improved by recognizing the challenges that device manufacturers face and by sharing the risk associated with evaluations of effectiveness. Health technology assessment is a powerful tool that can be used to evaluate new and potentially obsolete technologies alike, with the goal of meeting the needs of patients as customers of both the device industry and the health care system.

Decision makers are faced with the task of allocating health resources to maximize patients' health under budget constraints. To offer structure to the complexity of the decision-making process, the field of health technology assessment (HTA) was developed. This paper offers an introduction to the fundamental aspects of HTA and acts as a guide to the conduct of HTA for radiologists. First, the authors define HTA and describe how it is linked to the field of diagnostics. Second, a basic 11-step framework for the conduct of an HTA is outlined. The framework begins with the identification of the problem and proceeds through to the dissemination and impact of an HTA. Third, the authors provide a real-world example of an HTA in the field of diagnostics. Last, they describe the challenges and barriers faced in HTA.

Background: Reducing wait times for cataract surgery is a priority in Ontario. However, no previous analysis has determined whether the extra treatment volumes required to reduce wait times are of good monetary value when compared with allocating those same financial resources to new programs, drugs, or technologies. The objective of the study was to use queuing models to determine the cost-effectiveness of reducing, to target levels, wait times for cataract surgery at the provincial level within 1 to 10 years by increasing treatment volumes., Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed by estimating the extra treatment volume required to reduce wait times using queuing model methodology. The cost of these extra treatments was obtained from Ontario provincial data. The incremental benefits of surgery are improvements in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and these values were obtained from the clinical literature. Incremental costs were compared with incremental benefits to determine an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio., Results: To reach the publicly stated target wait times, annual treatment volumes must increase by 4%. An extra increase in treatment volumes of 25,660 must also be provided for the transition period from the current wait time. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio is $17,829 per QALY if the target wait time is achieved in 5 years, and this ratio is less than the common threshold for approval of new interventions, of $50,000 per QALY., Interpretation: Increasing treatment volumes is a cost-effective way of reducing wait times.