A synthesis of cost-utility analysis literature in infectious disease
Stone, Patricia W. ; Schackman, Bruce R. ; Neukermans, Christopher P. ; Olchanski, Natalia V. ; Greenberg, Dan ; Rosen, Allison B. ; Neumann, Peter J.
Citations
Student Authors
Faculty Advisor
Academic Program
UMass Chan Affiliations
Document Type
Publication Date
Subject Area
Embargo Expiration Date
Link to Full Text
Abstract
The purpose of this review is to understand infectious disease-related cost-utility analyses by describing published analyses, examining growth and quality trends over time, examining factors related to quality, and summarising standardised results. 122 cost-utility analyses and 352 cost-utility ratios were identified. Pharmaceutical interventions were most common (47.5%); three author groups accounted for 42.8% of pharmaceutical ratios. High-volume journals (three or more published cost-utility analyses) published higher quality analyses than low-volume journals (p<0.001). Use of probabilistic sensitivity analysis and discounting at 3% were more frequently found in the years after the US Public Health Service Panel on Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine recommendations (p<0.01). Median ratios varied from US13,500 dollars/quality-adjusted life year (QALY) for immunisations to US810,000 dollars/QALY for blood safety. Publication of infectious disease cost-utility analyses is increasing. The results of cost-utility analyses have important implications for the development of clinical guidelines and resource allocation decisions. More trained investigators and better peer-review processes are needed.
Source
Lancet Infect Dis. 2005 Jun;5(6):383-91. Link to article on publisher's site