Analytical Frameworks and Outcome Measures in Economic Evaluations of Digital Health Interventions: A Methodological Systematic Review

Author:

Benedetto Valerio12ORCID,Filipe Luís23,Harris Catherine12ORCID,Spencer Joseph24,Hickson Carmel5,Clegg Andrew12

Affiliation:

1. Synthesis, Economic Evaluation and Decision Science (SEEDS) Group, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Unit, Applied Health Research hub, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK

2. Methodological Innovation, Development, Adaptation and Support (MIDAS) Theme, National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast (NIHR ARC NWC), Liverpool, Merseyside, UK

3. Department of Health Research, Faculty of Health & Medicine, Lancaster University, Lancaster, Lancashire, UK

4. Research Facilitation and Delivery Unit (RFDU), Applied Health Research hub, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, Lancashire, UK

5. Public Advisers’ Forum, National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast (NIHR ARC NWC), Liverpool, Merseyside, UK

Abstract

Background Digital health interventions (DHIs) can improve the provision of health care services. To fully account for their effects in economic evaluations, traditional methods based on measuring health-related quality of life may not be appropriate, as nonhealth and process outcomes are likely to be relevant too. Purpose This systematic review identifies, assesses, and synthesizes the arguments on the analytical frameworks and outcome measures used in the economic evaluations of DHIs. The results informed recommendations for future economic evaluations. Data Sources We ran searches on multiple databases, complemented by gray literature and backward and forward citation searches. Study Selection We included records containing theoretical and empirical arguments associated with the use of analytical frameworks and outcome measures for economic evaluations of DHIs. Following title/abstract and full-text screening, our final analysis included 15 studies. Data Extraction The arguments we extracted related to analytical frameworks (14 studies), generic outcome measures (5 studies), techniques used to elicit utility values (3 studies), and disease-specific outcome measures and instruments to collect health states data (both from 2 studies). Data Synthesis Rather than assessing the quality of the studies, we critically assessed and synthesized the extracted arguments. Building on this synthesis, we developed a 3-stage set of recommendations in which we encourage the use of impact matrices and analyses of equity impacts to integrate traditional economic evaluation methods. Limitations Our review and recommendations explored but not fully covered other potentially important aspects of economic evaluations that were outside our scope. Conclusions This is the first systematic review that summarizes the arguments on how the effects of DHIs could be measured in economic evaluations. Our recommendations will help design future economic evaluations. Highlights Using traditional outcome measures based on health-related quality of life (such as the quality-adjusted life-year) may not be appropriate in economic evaluations of digital health interventions, which are likely to trigger nonhealth and process outcomes. This is the first systematic review to investigate how the effects of digital health interventions could be measured in economic evaluations. We extracted and synthesized different arguments from the literature, outlining advantages and disadvantages associated with different methods used to measure the effects of digital health interventions. We propose a methodological set of recommendations in which 1) we suggest that researchers consider the use of impact matrices and cost-consequence analysis, 2) we discuss the suitability of analytical frameworks and outcome measures available in economic evaluations, and 3) we highlight the need for analyses of equity impacts.

Funder

National Institute for Health and Care Research Applied Research Collaboration North West Coast

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Health Policy

Reference44 articles.

1. Ekholm A. Empathy and high tech. 2012. Available from: http://www.government.se/content/1/c6/20/85/50/15b38271.pdf

2. Ageing populations: the challenges ahead

3. Economic Evaluation of Telemedicine: Review of the Literature and Research Guidelines for Benefit–Cost Analysis

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