Cost-effectiveness of cancer interventions in Rwanda: literature review and expert elicitation for health benefits package design

卢旺达癌症干预措施的成本效益:文献综述和专家意见征询,以制定健康福利方案

阅读:1

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Prioritising health benefits packages (HBPs) that specify which health services are covered under insurance is sometimes done in disease-specific clusters. Cancer is a good candidate for this, given its high cost and rising disease burden, particularly in low- and middle-income countries.The Government of Rwanda assessed 49 cancers against nine criteria to inform the design of its HBP. Each cancer had a basic, core and enhanced package of services, and one preventive intervention was assessed, totalling 148 interventions. This paper focuses on the results of one criterion: cost-effectiveness. The objectives were to specify which cost-effectiveness methods were selected and why; to assess the cost-effectiveness of 148 cancer interventions; and to recommend how to strengthen the global cost-effectiveness evidence base. METHODS: Methods were selected using an adaptive health technology assessment approach, by considering the trade-offs between available time, data and capacity. The assessment undertook a review of the Tufts cost-effectiveness assessment (CEA) registry and filled evidence gaps with structured expert elicitation. Analysts summarised lessons learnt to recommend improvements to the global cost-effectiveness evidence base. RESULTS: Of the 148 cost-effectiveness ratios (CERs) sought, 39 were from the Tufts registry and 83 were expert elicited. Limited availability of CERs from the literature resulted in a disproportionate number of CERs being elicited from experts. Analysts recommend better reporting and improved consistency in the extraction of CEAs to support HBP design. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to assess the cost-effectiveness of many cancers simultaneously for HBP design. It highlights the strengths and limitations of existing evidence and demonstrates the feasibility of combining rapid review with expert elicitation to obtain replicable CER estimates. These cost-effectiveness findings were used to prioritise a package of cancer services for Rwanda alongside several other criteria (reported separately).

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。