Zhao, T and Ahmad, H and de Graaff, B and Xia, Q and Winzenberg, T and Aitken, D and Palmer, AJ, A systematic review of the evolution of health-economic evaluation models of osteoarthritis, Arthritis Care & Research pp. 1-34. ISSN 2151-464X (2020) [Refereed Article]
|PDF (Accepted Manuscript)|
Available from 17 August 2021
"This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: A Systematic Review of the Evolution of Health‐Economic Evaluation Models of Osteoarthritis, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1002/acr.24410. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Use of Self-Archived Versions."
Methods: The literature was searched within health-economic/biomedical databases. Data extracted included: OA type, population characteristics, model setting/type/events, study perspective, comparators; and the reporting quality of the studies was assessed. The review protocol was registered at the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration: CRD42018092937).
Results: Eighty-eight studies were included. Pharmacological and surgical interventions were the focus in 51% and 44% studies, respectively. Twenty-four studies adopted a societal perspective (with increasing popularity after 2013), however most (63%) did not include indirect costs. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was the most popular outcome measure since 2008. Markov models were used by 62% of studies, with increasing popularity since 2008. Until 2010, most studies used short-to-medium time horizons; subsequently a lifetime horizon became popular. Eighty-six percent of studies reported discount rate(s) (predominantly between 3% and 5%). Studies published after 2002 had a better coverage of OA-related adverse events (AEs). Reporting quality significantly improved after 2001.
Conclusions: OA HEEMs have evolved and improved substantially over time, with focus shifting from short-to-medium-term pharmacological decision-tree models to surgical-focused lifetime Markov models. Indirect costs of OA are frequently not considered, despite using a societal perspective. There was lack of reporting sensitivity of model outcome to input parameters including discount rate, OA definition, and population parameters. Whilst the coverage of OA-related AEs has improved over time, it is still not comprehensive.
|Item Type:||Refereed Article|
|Keywords:||systematic review, health economic models, osteoarthritis, health-economic evaluation, Markov models, decision-tree models|
|Research Group:||Applied economics|
|Research Field:||Health economics|
|Objective Group:||Public health (excl. specific population health)|
|Objective Field:||Public health (excl. specific population health) not elsewhere classified|
|UTAS Author:||Zhao, T (Miss Ting Zhao)|
|UTAS Author:||Ahmad, H (Mr Hasnat Ahmad)|
|UTAS Author:||de Graaff, B (Dr Barbara de Graaff)|
|UTAS Author:||Xia, Q (Miss Qing Xia)|
|UTAS Author:||Winzenberg, T (Professor Tania Winzenberg)|
|UTAS Author:||Aitken, D (Associate Professor Dawn Aitken)|
|UTAS Author:||Palmer, AJ (Professor Andrew Palmer)|
|Deposited By:||Menzies Institute for Medical Research|
Repository Staff Only: item control page