The limited incorporation of economic analyses in clinical practice guidelines

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Because there is increasing concern that economic data are not used in the clinical guideline development process, our objective was to evaluate the extent to which economic analyses are incorporated in guideline development. METHODS: We searched medline and HealthSTAR databases to identify English‐language clinical practice guidelines (1996–1999) and economic analyses (1990–1998). Additional guidelines were obtained from The National Guidelines Clearinghouse Internet site available at http://www.guideline.gov. Eligible guidelines met the Institute of Medicine definition and addressed a topic included in an economic analysis. Eligible economic analyses assessed interventions addressed in a guideline and predated the guideline by 1 or more years. Economic analyses were defined as incorporated in guideline development if 1) the economic analysis or the results were mentioned in the text or 2) listed as a reference. The quality of economic analyses was assessed using a structured scoring system. RESULTS: Using guidelines as the unit of analysis, 9 of 35 (26%) incorporated at least 1 economic analysis of above‐average quality in the text and 11 of 35 (31%) incorporated at least 1 in the references. Using economic analyses as the unit of analysis, 63 economic analyses of above‐average quality had opportunities for incorporation in 198 instances across the 35 guidelines. Economic analyses were incorporated in the text in 13 of 198 instances (7%) and in the references in 18 of 198 instances (9%). CONCLUSIONS: Rigorous economic analyses may be infrequently incorporated in the development of clinical practice guidelines. A systematic approach to guideline development should be used to ensure the consideration of economic analyses so that recommendations from guidelines may impact both the quality of care and the efficient allocation of resources.

Identification of factors driving differences in cost effectiveness of first-line pharmacological therapy for uncomplicated hypertension

“…While information from cost-effectiveness studies is rarely formally integrated into guideline development (25), given the reality of finite health care resources, it is imperative to explicitly integrate findings from such analyses into recommendations to ensure health system sustainability. Relying on drug acquisition costs alone may not be reliable to estimate cost effectiveness, particularly in jurisdictions where the relative differences among drug class costs have decreased.…”

Improving the use of research evidence in guideline development: 11. Incorporating considerations of cost-effectiveness, affordability and resource implications

“…Only 41.6% made any mention of projected effects on health care costs, and only 14.3% quantified these estimates in any way. A 2002 study on the incorporation of published cost-effectiveness analysis in published clinical guidelines showed that, using guidelines as the unit of analysis, 9 of 35 (26%) incorporated at least 1 economic analysis of above-average quality in the text and 11 of 35 (31%) incorporated at least 1 in the references [8]. Finally, a search of the database of the National Guideline Clearinghouse [9] showed that of 1616 guidelines published between 2000–2005, only 369 or 23% had a formal cost analysis.…”

Development of a weighted scale to assess the quality of cost-effectiveness studies and an application to the economic evaluations of tetravalent HPV vaccine

“…Several experts advocate the use of weighted items of checklists for the evaluation of economic analyses (Ungar and Santos 2003;Gonzalez Perez 2002). Moreover, currently available scoring systems for assessing the quality of economic analysis are, in same cases, not based on a well-known and commonly shared checklist but on key elements drawn from different checklists (Chiou 2003;Wallace 2002;Ungar and Santos 2003); others were developed which gave a full score to items for which an explicit answer was retrievable in the text and half score in the case of a not clear answer in the text (Gonzalez Perez 2002). All these systems were judged to be useful for researchers and policy-makers to evaluate the quality of studies, even though they have limits.…”