Examining the use of economic evaluations in health-related humanitarian programmes in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Author:

Makhani Lizna A1,Moran Valerie23,Sadique Zia1,Singh Neha S1ORCID,Revill Paul4ORCID,Roberts Bayard1

Affiliation:

1. Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK

2. Luxembourg Institute of Health, 1 A-B Rue Thomas Edison, 1445 Strassen, Luxembourg

3. Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research, 11 Porte des Sciences, 4366 Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg

4. Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Alcuin ‘A’ Block, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK

Abstract

Abstract The costly nature of health sector responses to humanitarian crises and resource constraints means that there is a need to identify methods for priority setting and long-term planning. One method is economic evaluation. The aim of this systematic review is to examine the use of economic evaluations in health-related humanitarian programmes in low- and middle-income countries. This review used peer-reviewed literature published between January 1980 and June 2018 extracted from four main electronic bibliographic databases. The eligibility criteria were full economic evaluations (which compare the costs and outcomes of at least two interventions and provide information on efficiency) of health-related services in humanitarian crises in low- and middle-countries. The quality of eligible studies is appraised using the modified 36-question Drummond checklist. From a total of 8127 total studies, 11 full economic evaluations were identified. All economic evaluations were cost-effectiveness analyses. Three of the 11 studies used a provider perspective, 2 studies used a healthcare system perspective, 3 studies used a societal perspective and 3 studies did not specify the perspective used. The lower quality studies failed to provide 7information on the unit of costs and did not justify the time horizon of costs and discount rates, or conduct a sensitivity analysis. There was limited geographic range of the studies, with 9 of the 11 studies conducted in Africa. Recommendations include greater use of economic evaluation methods and data to enhance the microeconomic understanding of health interventions in humanitarian settings to support greater efficiency and transparency and to strengthen capacity by recruiting economists and providing training in economic methods to humanitarian agencies.

Funder

Global Challenges Research Fund

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Health Policy

Cited by 11 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3