Health economics of asthma: assessing the value of asthma interventions

Abstract

The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and assess the quality of asthma intervention health economic studies from 2002 to 2007, compare the study findings with clinical management guidelines, and suggest avenues for future improvement of asthma health economic studies. Forty of the 177 studies met our inclusion criteria. We assessed the quality of studies using The Quality of Health Economic Studies validated instrument (total score range: 0–100). Six studies (15%) had quality category 2, 26 studies (65%) achieved quality category 3, and the remaining eight (20%) studies were scored as the highest quality level, category 4. Overall, the findings from this review are in line with the Global Initiative for Asthma clinical guidelines. Many asthma health economic studies lacked appropriate long term time horizons to match the chronic nature of the disease and suffered from using effectiveness measures that did not capture all disease related risks and benefits. We recommend that new asthma simulation models: be flexible to allow for long term time horizons, focus on using levels of asthma control in their structure, and estimate both long term asthma specific outcomes like well‐controlled time as well as generic outcomes such as quality adjusted survival.

Economic Evidence for US Asthma Self-Management Education and Home-Based Interventions

“…This review builds on prior work 63, 86 by updating, comprehensively synthesizing, and examining current evidence regarding economic sustainability of intensive outpatient AS-ME and home-based intervention programs for asthma in the United States. These findings represent timely evidence for clinicians, health care administrators, public health officials, policy makers, investigators and others to consider expanding health care-public health collaboration efforts to improve asthma control.…”

Systematic Review and Quality Appraisal of Cost-Effectiveness Analyses of Pharmacologic Maintenance Treatment for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Methodological Considerations and Recommendations

“…If the results differed between reviewers, consensus was reached through discussion. Four QHES-based quality levels have been established in previous assessments: category 1 (0–25.0 points), category 2 (25.1–50.0 points), category 3 (50.1–75.0 points) and category 4 (75.1–100 points) [13]. …”

Rola Lekarza Pierwszego Kontaktu w Leczeniu Astmy

“…Obecne standardy diagnostyki i leczenia astmy oraz wytyczne specjalistów zdrowia publicznego zalecają wczesną diagnostykę astmy i wczesne leczenie przeciwzapalne w celu zmniejszenia kosztów społecznych i finansowych spowodowanych tą niezwykle częstą chorobą [8][9][10].…”