Developing the Lebanese health economic evaluation guideline.

OBJECTIVE: To report on the process of developing the Lebanese Economic Evaluation Guideline (LEEG), and to provide relevant material that could assist guideline developers in the future. METHODS: The development of the LEEG closely followed the process proposed by the World Health Organization, i.e. to set up a Guideline Development Group (composed of three Lebanese experts), to establish the rationale for developing the guideline in Lebanon, to identify its scope, to search and retrieve evidence through two systematic reviews, to assess and present the evidence, to translate the evidence into guidelines and recommendations through a deliberative process, and to consult international experts. The deliberative process included a survey, an in-person interview, and a consensus workshop with 16 Lebanese key stakeholders. Data was collected and quantitative analysis was conducted using SPSS software. International experts from Maastricht University - The Netherlands were consulted for issuing the LEEG. Supported by the Lebanese Ministry of Public Health (MoPH), the LEEG will be available for public consultation on the MoPH's webpage, and a final version will be made available thereafter. CONCLUSION: Clear and transparent reporting of the guideline development process should support international organizations as well as other developers in establishing their guidelines within their national context.

The development process of economic evaluation guidelines in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To review the development of economic evaluation guidelines (EEGs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), with the goal of assisting those developing EEGs in LMICs. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, EconLit, Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Library, and the gray literature until March 2021. We extracted data on the methods used in the EEG development process, the responsible party engaged, and the development team's composition. We conducted a quality assessment, using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-Health Systems tool, and then carried out a relative comparison. RESULTS: Fourteen EEGs and nine studies were identified. In ten countries, the Ministry of Health was responsible for handling the development process. The majority of LMICs who developed EEGs did not explicitly report the discipline of those involved in the process. The developers of EEGs followed four main steps: conducting a review on national guidelines, organizing workshops, and getting support from international experts or from organizations. One-third of the identified EEGs failed to engage multisectoral or multidisciplinary developers, and approximately 14 percent did not follow or report any recommended step. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified a scarcity of published information related to the development process and the suboptimal quality of included studies. It provides relevant material to support international organizations and developers of guidelines in LMICs in developing EEGs that fit their national context. In addition, this paper recommends a transparent approach to the design of guidelines and to reporting on the methods for developing them.

The Economic and societal burden of multiple sclerosis on lebanese society: a cost-of-illness and quality of life study protocol.

This protocol describes the estimation of the societal costs and quality-of-life (QOL) burden of multiple sclerosis (MS) in Lebanon. This cross-sectional, prevalence-based burden-of-illness study was carried out in a premier MS center in Lebanon. We enrolled Lebanese patients aged 18 years and older who had been diagnosed with MS more than 6 months. The study uses a bottom-up approach to estimate the cost-of-illness (COI) and QOL using a retrospective face-to-face interview questionnaire. This resource utilization questionnaire was adapted to the Lebanese context by clinical and health economics experts. The methodologies used to estimate the consumption of healthcare resources, informal care, and productivity losses are well-defined and aligned with the Lebanese healthcare system. Costs are presented overall and by MS severity levels. QOL is measured using the EuroQOL (EQ-5D-5 L) and Multiple Sclerosis International Quality of Life (MusiQoL) instrument. This protocol pioneers in informing the design of future COI and QOL studies in low - and middle-income countries (LMICs), as the methods used could be applied in similar LMICs. Furthermore, we provide recommendations and discuss the challenges of conducting a high-quality burden-of-illness study in LMICs and the steps taken to meet them, using the case of Lebanon.

Economic evaluation guidelines in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically identify the latest versions of official economic evaluation guidelines (EEGs) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) and explore similarities and differences in their content. METHODS: We conducted a systematic search in MEDLINE (Ovid), PubMed, EconLit, Embase (Ovid), the Cochrane Library, and the gray literature. Using a predefined checklist, we extracted the key features of economic evaluation and the general characteristics of EEGs. We conducted a comparative analysis, including a summary of similarities and differences across EEGs. RESULTS: Thirteen EEGs were identified, three pertaining to lower-middle-income countries (Bhutan, Egypt, and Indonesia), nine to upper-middle-income countries (Brazil, China, Colombia, Cuba, Malaysia, Mexico, Russian Federation, South Africa, and Thailand), in addition to Mercosur, and none to low-income countries. The majority (n = 12) considered cost-utility analysis and health-related quality-of-life outcome. Half of the EEGs recommended the societal perspective, whereas the other half recommended the healthcare perspective. Equity considerations were required in ten EEGs. Most EEGs (n = 11) required the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio and recommended sensitivity analysis, as well as the presentation of a budget impact analysis (n = 10). Seven of the identified EEGs were mandatory for pharmacoeconomics submission. Methodological gaps, contradictions, and heterogeneity in terminologies used were identified within the guidelines. CONCLUSION: As the importance of health technology assessment is increasing in LMICs, this systematic review could help researchers explore key aspects of existing EEGs in LMICs and explore differences among them. It could also support international organizations in guiding LMICs to develop their own EEGs and improve the methodological framework of existing ones.