PharmacoEconomics · 2024
Rethinking Tuberculosis Morbidity Quantification: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of TB Disability Weights in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses.
СтатьяСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tomeny Ewan M, Hampton Thomas, Tran Phuong Bich, Rosu Laura, Phiri Mphatso D, Haigh Kathryn A, Nidoi Jasper, Wingfield Tom, Worrall Eve
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The disability-adjusted life year (DALY), a key metric for health resource allocation, encompasses morbidity through disability weights. Widely used in tuberculosis cost-effectiveness analysis (CEAs), DALYs play a significant role in informing intervention adopt/reject decisions. This study reviews the values and consistency of disability weights applied in tuberculosis-related CEAs.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using the Tufts CEA database, updated to July 2023 with searches in Embase, Scopus and PubMed. Eligible studies needed to have included a cost-per-DALY ratio, and additionally either evaluated a tuberculosis (TB) intervention or included tuberculosis-related weights. We considered all tuberculosis health states: with/without human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, TB treatments and treatment side effects. Data were screened and extracted independently by combinations of two authors.
FINDINGS: A total of 105 studies spanning 2002-2023 across 50 countries (mainly low- and middle-income countries) were extracted. Disability weights were sourced primarily from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD; 100/165; 61%), with 17 non-GBD studies additionally referenced, along with primary derivation. Inconsistencies in the utilisation of weights were evident: of the 100 usages of GBD-sourced weights, only in 47 instances (47%) had the weight value been explicitly specified with an appropriate up-to-date reference cited (constituting 28% of all weight usages, 47/165). Sensitivity analyses on weight values had been conducted in 30% of studies (31/105). Twelve studies did not clearly specify weights or their sources; nine further calculated DALYs without morbidity. The review suggests methodological gaps in current approaches for representing important aspects of TB, including TB-HIV coinfection, treatment, drug-resistance, extrapulmonary TB and psychological impacts. We propose a set of best practice recommendations.
INTERPRETATION: There is a need for increased rigour in the application, sensitivity testing and reporting of TB disability weights. Furthermore, there appears a desire among researchers to reflect elements of the tuberculosis experience beyond those allowed for by GBD disability weights.
METHODS: We conducted a systematic review using the Tufts CEA database, updated to July 2023 with searches in Embase, Scopus and PubMed. Eligible studies needed to have included a cost-per-DALY ratio, and additionally either evaluated a tuberculosis (TB) intervention or included tuberculosis-related weights. We considered all tuberculosis health states: with/without human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, TB treatments and treatment side effects. Data were screened and extracted independently by combinations of two authors.
FINDINGS: A total of 105 studies spanning 2002-2023 across 50 countries (mainly low- and middle-income countries) were extracted. Disability weights were sourced primarily from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD; 100/165; 61%), with 17 non-GBD studies additionally referenced, along with primary derivation. Inconsistencies in the utilisation of weights were evident: of the 100 usages of GBD-sourced weights, only in 47 instances (47%) had the weight value been explicitly specified with an appropriate up-to-date reference cited (constituting 28% of all weight usages, 47/165). Sensitivity analyses on weight values had been conducted in 30% of studies (31/105). Twelve studies did not clearly specify weights or their sources; nine further calculated DALYs without morbidity. The review suggests methodological gaps in current approaches for representing important aspects of TB, including TB-HIV coinfection, treatment, drug-resistance, extrapulmonary TB and psychological impacts. We propose a set of best practice recommendations.
INTERPRETATION: There is a need for increased rigour in the application, sensitivity testing and reporting of TB disability weights. Furthermore, there appears a desire among researchers to reflect elements of the tuberculosis experience beyond those allowed for by GBD disability weights.