An overview of the perspectives used in health economic evaluations.

The term 'perspective' in the context of economic evaluations and costing studies in healthcare refers to the viewpoint that an analyst has adopted to define the types of costs and outcomes to consider in their studies. However, there are currently notable variations in terms of methodological recommendations, definitions, and applications of different perspectives, depending on the objective or intended user of the study. This can make it a complex area for stakeholders when interpreting these studies. Consequently, there is a need for a comprehensive overview regarding the different types of perspectives employed in such analyses, along with the corresponding implications of their use. This is particularly important, in the context of low-and-middle-income countries (LMICs), where practical guidelines may be less well-established and infrastructure for conducting economic evaluations may be more limited. This article addresses this gap by summarising the main types of perspectives commonly found in the literature to a broad audience (namely the patient, payer, health care providers, healthcare sector, health system, and societal perspectives), providing their most established definitions and outlining the corresponding implications of their uses in health economic studies, with examples particularly from LMIC settings. We then discuss important considerations when selecting the perspective and present key arguments to consider when deciding whether the societal perspective should be used. We conclude that there is no one-size-fits-all answer to what perspective should be used and the perspective chosen will be influenced by the context, policymakers'/stakeholders' viewpoints, resource/data availability, and intended use of the analysis. Moving forward, considering the ongoing issues regarding the variation in terminology and practice in this area, we urge that more standardised definitions of the different perspectives and the boundaries between them are further developed to support future studies and guidelines, as well as to improve the interpretation and comparison of health economic evidence.

Gender disparities in lost productivity resulting from non-communicable diseases in Mexico, 2005-2021.

Background: Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) cause long-term impacts on health and can substantially affect people's ability to work. Little is known about how such impacts vary by gender, particularly in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), where productivity losses may affect economic development. This study assessed the long-term productivity loss caused by major NCDs among adult women and men (20-76 years) in Mexico because of premature death and hospitalisations, between 2005 and 2021. Methods: We conducted an economic valuation based on the Human Capital Approach. We obtained population-based data from the National Employment Survey from 2005 to 2021 to estimate the expected productivity according to age and gender using a two-part model. We utilised expected productivity based on wage rates to calculate the productivity loss, employing Mexican official mortality registries and hospital discharge microdata for the same period. To assess the variability in our estimations, we performed sensitivity analyses under two different scenarios. Results: Premature mortality by cancers, diabetes, chronic cardiovascular diseases (CVD), chronic respiratory diseases (CRD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) caused a productivity loss of 102.6 billion international US dollars (Intl. USD) from 2.8 million premature deaths. Seventy-three percent of this productivity loss was observed among men. Cancers caused 38.3% of the productivity loss (mainly among women), diabetes 38.1, CVD 15.1, CRD 3.2, and CKD 5.3%. Regarding hospitalisations, the estimated productivity loss was 729.7 million Intl. USD from 54.2 million days of hospitalisation. Men faced 65.4 and women 34.6% of these costs. Cancers caused 41.3% of the productivity loss mainly by women, followed by diabetes (22.1%), CKD (20.4%), CVD (13.6%) and CRD (2.6%). Conclusions: Major NCDs impose substantial costs from lost productivity in Mexico and these tend to be higher amongst men, while for some diseases the economic burden is higher for women. This should be considered to inform policymakers to design effective gender-sensitive health and social protection interventions to tackle the burden of NCDs.

The role of funded partnerships in working towards decreasing COVID-19 vaccination disparities, United States, March 2021-December 2022.

During the COVID-19 vaccination rollout from March 2021- December 2022, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention funded 110 primary and 1051 subrecipient partners at the national, state, local, and community-based level to improve COVID-19 vaccination access, confidence, demand, delivery, and equity in the United States. The partners implemented evidence-based strategies among racial and ethnic minority populations, rural populations, older adults, people with disabilities, people with chronic illness, people experiencing homelessness, and other groups disproportionately impacted by COVID-19. CDC also expanded existing partnerships with healthcare professional societies and other core public health partners, as well as developed innovative partnerships with organizations new to vaccination, including museums and libraries. Partners brought COVID-19 vaccine education into farm fields, local fairs, churches, community centers, barber and beauty shops, and, when possible, partnered with local healthcare providers to administer COVID-19 vaccines. Inclusive, hyper-localized outreach through partnerships with community-based organizations, faith-based organizations, vaccination providers, and local health departments was critical to increasing COVID-19 vaccine access and building a broad network of trusted messengers that promoted vaccine confidence. Data from monthly and quarterly REDCap reports and monthly partner calls showed that through these partnerships, more than 295,000 community-level spokespersons were trained as trusted messengers and more than 2.1 million COVID-19 vaccinations were administered at new or existing vaccination sites. More than 535,035 healthcare personnel were reached through outreach strategies. Quality improvement interventions were implemented in healthcare systems, long-term care settings, and community health centers resulting in changes to the clinical workflow to incorporate COVID-19 vaccine assessments, recommendations, and administration or referrals into routine office visits. Funded partners' activities improved COVID-19 vaccine access and addressed community concerns among racial and ethnic minority groups, as well as among people with barriers to vaccination due to chronic illness or disability, older age, lower income, or other factors.

What are economic costs and when should they be used in health economic studies?

Economic analyses of healthcare interventions are an important consideration in evidence-based policymaking. A key component of such analyses is the costs of interventions, for which most are familiar with using budgets and expenditures. However, economic theory states that the true value of a good/service is the value of the next best alternative forgone as a result of using the resource and therefore observed prices or charges do not necessarily reflect the true economic value of resources. To address this, economic costs are a fundamental concept within (health) economics. Crucially, they are intended to reflect the resources' opportunity costs (the forgone opportunity to use those resources for another purpose) and they are based on the value of the resource's next-best alternative use that has been forgone. This is a broader conceptualization of a resource's value than its financial cost and recognizes that resources can have a value that may not be fully captured by their market price and that by using a resource it makes it unavailable for productive use elsewhere. Importantly, economic costs are preferred over financial costs for any health economic analyses aimed at informing decisions regarding the optimum allocation of the limited/competing resources available for healthcare (such as health economic evaluations), and they are also important when considering the replicability and sustainability of healthcare interventions. However, despite this, economic costs and the reasons why they are used is an area that can be misunderstood by professionals without an economic background. In this paper, we outline to a broader audience the principles behind economic costs and when and why they should be used within health economic analyses. We highlight that the difference between financial and economic costs and what adjustments are needed within cost calculations will be influenced by the context of the study, the perspective, and the objective.

A Gender-Based and Quasi-Experimental Study of the Catastrophic and Impoverishing Health-Care Expenditures in Mexican Households with Elderly Members, 2000-2020.

Latin America has experienced a rise in noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) which is having repercussions on the structuring of healthcare delivery and social protection for vulnerable populations. We examined catastrophic (CHE) and excessive (EHE, impoverishing and/or catastrophic) health care expenditures in Mexican households with and without elderly members (≥65 years), by gender of head of the households, during 2000-2020. We analyzed pooled cross-sectional data for 380,509 households from eleven rounds of the National Household Income and Expenditure Survey. Male- and female-headed households (MHHs and FHHs) were matched using propensity scores to control for gender bias in systematic differences regarding care-seeking (demand for healthcare) preferences. Adjusted probabilities of positive health expenditures, CHE and EHE were estimated using probit and two-stage probit models, respectively. Quintiles of EHE by state among FHHs with elderly members were also mapped. CHE and EHE were greater among FHHs than among MHHs (4.7% vs 3.9% and 5.5% vs 4.6%), and greater in FHHs with elderly members (5.8% vs 4.9% and 6.9% vs 5.8%). EHE in FHHs with elderly members varied geographically from 3.9% to 9.1%, being greater in less developed eastern, north-central and southeastern states. Compared with MHHs, FHHs face greater risks of CHE and EHE. This vulnerability is exacerbated in FHHs with elderly members, because of gender intersectional vulnerability. The present context, marked by a growing burden of NCDs and inequities amplified by COVID-19, makes key interlinkages across multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) apparent, and calls for urgent measures that strengthen social protection in health.

Medical education for African American communities in the rural South: A focus group approach to identify fundamental considerations.

PURPOSE: We sought to understand concerns fundamental to planning medical education specific to rural southern African Americans who are virtually nonexistent in American medical schools. METHODS: A diverse multidisciplinary research team conducted this qualitative study with 3 focus groups, including 17 rural medical educators recruited nationwide, 10 African American alumni of a rural medical education pipeline in Alabama, and 5 community and institutional associates of this pipeline. Analysis of recorded transcripts generated themes fitting an ecological model suggesting concerns and intervention foci at individual, community, and institutional levels. FINDINGS: Three major themes operating at all ecological levels were: (1) How "rural minority student" is defined, with "rural" often supplanting race to indicate minority status; (2) Multiple factors relate to rural racial minority student recruitment and success, including personal relationships with peers, mentors, and role models and supportive institutional policies and culturally competent faculty; and (3) Challenges to recruitment and retention of rural minority students, especially financial concerns and preparation for medical education. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that individuals, communities, and institutions provide intervention points for planning medical education specific to southern rural African Americans. These spheres of influence project a need for partnership among communities and rural medical educators to affect broad programmatic and policy changes that address the dire shortage of rural African American health professionals to help ameliorate health inequities experienced in their home communities. It is likely that linear thinking and programming will be replaced by integrated, intertwined conceptualizations to reach this goal.

An analysis of government-sponsored health insurance enrolment and claims data from Meghalaya: Insights into the provision of health care in North East India.

INTRODUCTION: The Megha Health Insurance Scheme (MHIS) was launched in 2013 in the North-East Indian state of Meghalaya to reduce household out-of-pocket expenditure on health and provide access to high-quality essential healthcare. Despite substantial expansion of the MHIS since the scheme's inception, there is a lack of comprehensive documentation and evaluation of the scheme's performance against its Universal Health Care (UHC) objectives. METHODS: We analysed six years of enrolment and claims data (2013-2018) covering three phases of the scheme to understand the pattern of enrolment, utilisation and care provision under the MHIS during this period. De-identified data files included information on age, sex, district of residence, the district of provider hospital, type of hospital, date of admission, status at discharge, claimed category of care, package codes, and amount claimed. Descriptive statistics were generated to investigate key trends in enrolment, service utilisation, and Government health spending under the MHIS. RESULTS: Approximately 55% of the eligible population are currently enrolled in MHIS. Enrolment increased consistently from phase I through III and remained broadly stable across districts, gender, age group and occupation categories, with a small decline in males 19-60 years. Claims were disproportionately skewed towards private provision; 57% of all claims accrued to the 18 empanelled private hospitals and 39% to the 159 public sector facilities. The package 'General Ward Unspecified' was responsible for the highest volume of claims and highest financial dispensation across all three phases of the scheme. This likely indicates substantial administrative error and is potentially masking both true burden of disease and accurate financial provision for care under the MHIS. Anti-rabies injections for dog/cat bite contributed to 11% of total claims under MHIS III, and 1.6% of all claims under MHIS II. This warrants investigation to better understand the burden of animal bites on the Meghalayan population and inform the implementation of cost-effective strategies to reduce this burden. CONCLUSIONS: This paper describes the first analysis of health insurance enrolment and claims data in the state of Meghalaya. The analysis has generated an important evidence base to inform future MHIS enrolment and care provision policies as the scheme expands to provide Universal Health Coverage to the state's entire population.

An Introduction to the Main Types of Economic Evaluations Used for Informing Priority Setting and Resource Allocation in Healthcare: Key Features, Uses, and Limitations.

Economic evidence is increasingly being used for informing health policies. However, the underlining principles of health economic analyses are not always fully understood by non-health economists, and inappropriate types of analyses, as well as inconsistent methodologies, may be being used for informing health policy decisions. In addition, there is a lack of open access information and methodological guidance targeted to public health professionals, particularly those based in low- and middle-income country (LMIC) settings. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive and accessible introduction to economic evaluations for public health professionals with a focus on LMIC settings. We cover the main principles underlining the most common types of full economic evaluations used in healthcare decision making in the context of priority setting (namely cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analyses, cost-benefit analyses), and outline their key features, strengths and weaknesses. It is envisioned that this will help those conducting such analyses, as well as stakeholders that need to interpret their output, gain a greater understanding of these methods and help them select/distinguish between the different approaches. In particular, we highlight the need for greater awareness of the methods used to place a monetary value on the health benefits of interventions, and the potential for such estimates to be misinterpreted. Specifically, the economic benefits reported are typically an approximation, summarising the health benefits experienced by a population monetarily in terms of individual preferences or potential productivity gains, rather than actual realisable or fiscal monetary benefits to payers or society.

A Systematic Review of the Costs Relating to Non-pharmaceutical Interventions Against Infectious Disease Outbreaks.

BACKGROUND: Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are the cornerstone of infectious disease outbreak response in the absence of effective pharmaceutical interventions. Outbreak strategies often involve combinations of NPIs that may change according to disease prevalence and population response. Little is known with regard to how costly each NPI is to implement. This information is essential to inform policy decisions for outbreak response. OBJECTIVE: To address this gap in existing literature, we conducted a systematic review on outbreak costings and simulation studies related to a number of NPI strategies, including isolating infected individuals, contact tracing and quarantine, and school closures. METHODS: Our search covered the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, studies published between 1990 and 24 March 2020 were included. We included studies containing cost data for our NPIs of interest in pandemic, epidemic, and outbreak response scenarios. RESULTS: We identified 61 relevant studies. There was substantial heterogeneity in the cost components recorded for NPIs in outbreak costing studies. The direct costs of NPIs for which costing studies existed also ranged widely: isolating infected individuals per case: US$141.18 to US$1042.68 (2020 values), tracing and quarantine of contacts per contact: US$40.73 to US$93.59, social distancing: US$33.76 to US$167.92, personal protection and hygiene: US$0.15 to US$895.60. CONCLUSION: While there are gaps and heterogeneity in available cost data, the findings of this review and the collated cost database serve as an important resource for evidence-based decision-making for estimating costs pertaining to NPI implementation in future outbreak response policies.

National Healthcare Economic Evaluation Guidelines: A Cross-Country Comparison.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Globally, a number of countries have developed guidelines that describe the design and conduct of economic evaluations as part of health technology assessment (HTA) or pharmacoeconomic analysis for decision making. The current scoping review was undertaken with an objective to summarize the recommendations made on methods of economic evaluation by the national healthcare economic evaluation (HEE) guidelines. METHODOLOGY: A comprehensive search was undertaken in the website repositories of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomic and Outcomes Research (ISPOR) and Guide to Economic Analysis and Research (GEAR), and websites of national HTA agencies and ministries of health of individual countries. All guidelines in the English language were included in this review. Data were extracted with respect to general and methodological characteristics, and a descriptive analysis of recommendations made across the countries was undertaken. RESULTS: Overall, our review included 31 national HEE guidelines, published between 1997 and August 2020. Nearly half (45%) of the guidelines targeted the evaluation of pharmaceuticals. The nature of the guidelines was either mandatory (31%), recommendatory (42%), or voluntary (16%). There was a substantial consensus among the guidelines on several key principles, including type of economic evaluation (cost-utility analysis), time horizon of the analysis (long enough), health outcome measure (quality-adjusted life-years) and use of sensitivity analyses. The recommendations on study perspective, comparator, discount rate and type of costs to be included (particularly the inclusion of indirect costs) varied widely. CONCLUSION: Despite similarity in the overall processes, variation in several recommendations given by various national HEE guidelines was observed. This is perhaps unsurprising given the differences in the health systems and financing mechanisms, capacity of local researchers, and data availability. This review offers important lessons and a starting point for countries that are planning to develop their own HEE guidelines.

The potential health and revenue effects of a tax on sugar sweetened beverages in Zambia.

The global burden of non-communicable diseases (NCDs) has been rising. A key risk factor for NCDs is obesity, which has been partly linked to consumption of sugar sweetened beverages (SSBs). A tax on SSBs is an attractive control measure to curb the rising trend in NCDs, as it has the potential to reduce consumption of SSBs. However, studies on the potential effects of SSB taxes have been concentrated in high-income countries with limited studies in low-income and middle-income countries. Using data from the 2015 Zambia Living Conditions Monitoring Survey (LCMS) data, the 2017 Zambia NCD STEPS Survey, and key parameters from the literature, we simulated the effect of a 25% SSB tax in Zambia on energy intake and the corresponding change in body mass index (BMI), obesity prevalence, deaths averted, life years gained and revenues generated using a mathematical model developed using Microsoft Excel. We conducted Monte Carlo simulations to construct 95% confidence bands and sensitivity analyses to account for uncertainties in key parameters. We found that a 25% SSB would avert 2526 deaths, though these results were not statistically significant overall. However, when broken down by gender, the tax was found to significantly avert 1133 deaths in women (95% CI 353 to 1970). The tax was found to potentially generate an additional US$5.46 million (95% CI 4.66 to 6.14) in revenue annually. We conclude that an SSB tax in Zambia has the potential to significantly decrease the amount of disability-adjusted life years lost to lifestyle-related diseases in women, highlighting important health equity outcomes. Women have higher baseline BMI and therefore are at higher risk for NCDs. In addition, an SSB tax will provide government with additional revenue which if earmarked for health could contribute to healthcare financing in Zambia.

What do we need to know? Data sources to support evidence-based decisions using health technology assessment in Ghana.

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based decision-making for prioritising health is assisted by health technology assessment (HTA) to integrate data on effectiveness, costs and equity to support transparent decisions. Ghana is moving towards universal health coverage, facilitated mainly by the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) established in 2003. The Government of Ghana is committed to institutionalising HTA for priority-setting. We aimed to identify and describe the sources of accessible data to support HTA in Ghana. METHODS: We identified and described data sources encompassing six main domains using an existing framework. The domains were epidemiology, clinical efficacy, costs, health service use and consumption, quality of life, and equity. We used existing knowledge, views of stakeholders, and searches of the literature and internet. RESULTS: The data sources for each of the six domains vary in extent and quality. Ghana has several large data sources to support HTA (e.g. Demographic Health Surveys) that have rigorous quality assurance processes. Few accessible data sources were available for costs and resource utilisation. The NHIS is a potentially rich source of data on resource use and costs but there are some limits on access. There are some data on equity but data on quality of life are limited. CONCLUSIONS: A small number of quality data sources are available in Ghana but there are some gaps with respect to HTA based on greater use of local and contextualised information. Although more data are becoming available for monitoring, challenges remain in terms of their usefulness for HTA, and some information may not be available in disaggregated form to enable specific analyses. We support recent initiatives for the routine collection of comprehensive and reliable data that is easily accessible for HTA users. A commitment to HTA will require concerted efforts to leverage existing data sources, for example, from the NHIS, and develop and maintain new data (e.g. local health utility estimates). It will be critical that an overarching strategic and mandatory approach to the collection and use of health information is developed for Ghana in parallel to, and informed by, the development of HTA approaches to support resource allocation decisions. The key to HTA is to use the best available data while being open about its limitations and the impact on uncertainty.

Addressing the Cost Data Gap for Universal Healthcare Coverage in India: A Call to Action.

The Indian health system is undergoing significant reform toward more evidence-informed and inclusive health policy as the country strives toward the achievement of Universal Health Coverage for its 1.3 billion population. Cost information plays a key role in the evidence arsenal of Universal Health Coverage-oriented policy by informing decisions such as the setting reimbursement rates for government-sponsored health insurance packages of care, strategic purchasing of health services, and in prioritizing available resources to maximize value of health sector investments. However, extensive and quality health facility cost data in India are limited. As a result, there is an increasing and urgent need to generate and disseminate healthcare cost information. This article discusses the need for cost information and the current initiatives that are progressing this agenda. The first is a national cost database and website hosting cost data collected from 200 public sector facilities across 6 Indian states at each level of the care delivery system by a consortium of health research institutes. This database is the first of its kind in India and will serve as a central resource for researchers and decision-makers for information on healthcare costs. The second is a nationwide costing study of healthcare at both private and public facilities. By improving the availability of cost data in India, raising its profile and demonstrating its utility, it is hoped that the database and new costing efforts will lead to greater recognition of the importance of good quality data to inform health policy and enable more evidence-informed decision-making.

Estimating the Unit Costs of Healthcare Service Delivery in India: Addressing Information Gaps for Price Setting and Health Technology Assessment.

BACKGROUND: India's flagship National Health insurance programme (AB-PMJAY) requires accurate cost information for evidence-based decision-making, strategic purchasing of health services and setting reimbursement rates. To address the challenge of limited health service cost data, this study used econometric methods to identify determinants of cost and estimate unit costs for each Indian state. METHODS: Using data from 81 facilities in six states, models were developed for inpatient and outpatient services at primary and secondary level public health facilities. A best-fit unit cost function was identified using guided stepwise regression and combined with data on health service infrastructure and utilisation to predict state-level unit costs. RESULTS: Health service utilisation had the greatest influence on unit cost, while number of beds, facility level and the state were also good predictors. For district hospitals, predicted cost per inpatient admission ranged from 1028 (313-3429) Indian Rupees (INR) to 4499 (1451-14,159) INR and cost per outpatient visit ranged from 91 (44-196) INR to 657 (339-1337) INR, across the states. For community healthcare centres and primary healthcare centres, cost per admission ranged from 412 (148-1151) INR to 3677 (1359-10,055) INR and cost per outpatient visit ranged from 96 (50-187) INR to 429 (217-844) INR. CONCLUSION: This is the first time cost estimates for inpatient admissions and outpatient visits for all states have been estimated using standardised data. The model demonstrates the usefulness of such an approach in the Indian context to help inform health technology assessment, budgeting and forecasting, as well as differential pricing, and could be applied to similar country contexts where cost data are limited.

Criteria Used for Priority-Setting for Public Health Resource Allocation in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to identify criteria being used for priority setting for resource allocation decisions in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). Furthermore, the included studies were analyzed from a policy perspective to understand priority setting processes in these countries. METHODS: Searches were carried out in PubMed, Embase, Econlit, and Cochrane databases, supplemented with pre-identified Web sites and bibliographic searches of relevant papers. Quality appraisal of included studies was undertaken. The review protocol is registered in International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews PROSPERO CRD42017068371. RESULTS: Of 16,412 records screened by title and abstract, 112 papers were identified for full text screening and 44 studies were included in the final analysis. At an overall level, cost-effectiveness 52 percent (n = 22) and health benefits 45 percent (n = 19) were the most cited criteria used for priority setting for public health resource allocation. Inter-region (LMICs) and between various approaches (like health technology assessment, multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA), accountability for reasonableness (AFR) variations among criteria were also noted. Our review found that MCDA approach was more frequently used in upper middle-income countries and AFR in lower-income countries for priority setting in health. Policy makers were the most frequently consulted stakeholders in all regions. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Priority-setting criteria for health resource allocation decisions in LMICs largely comprised of cost-effectiveness and health benefits criteria at overall level. Other criteria like legal and regulatory framework conducive for implementation, fairness/ethics, and political considerations were infrequently reported and should be considered.

Pharmacotherapy in Older Adults with Cardiovascular Disease: Report from an American College of Cardiology, American Geriatrics Society, and National Institute on Aging Workshop.

OBJECTIVES: To identify the top priority areas for research to optimize pharmacotherapy in older adults with cardiovascular disease (CVD). DESIGN: Consensus meeting. SETTING: Multidisciplinary workshop supported by the National Institute on Aging, the American College of Cardiology, and the American Geriatrics Society, February 6-7, 2017. PARTICIPANTS: Leaders in the Cardiology and Geriatrics communities, (officers in professional societies, journal editors, clinical trialists, Division chiefs), representatives from the NIA; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; Food and Drug Administration; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, Alliance for Academic Internal Medicine, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, pharmaceutical industry, and trainees and early career faculty with interests in geriatric cardiology. MEASUREMENTS: Summary of workshop proceedings and recommendations. RESULTS: To better align older adults' healthcare preferences with their care, research is needed to improve skills in patient engagement and communication. Similarly, to coordinate and meet the needs of older adults with multiple comorbidities encountering multiple healthcare providers and systems, systems and disciplines must be integrated. The lack of data from efficacy trials of CVD medications relevant to the majority of older adults creates uncertainty in determining the risks and benefits of many CVD therapies; thus, developing evidence-based guidelines for older adults with CVD is a top research priority. Polypharmacy and medication nonadherence lead to poor outcomes in older people, making research on appropriate prescribing and deprescribing to reduce polypharmacy and methods to improve adherence to beneficial therapies a priority. CONCLUSION: The needs and circumstances of older adults with CVD differ from those that the current medical system has been designed to meet. Optimizing pharmacotherapy in older adults will require new data from traditional and pragmatic research to determine optimal CVD therapy, reduce polypharmacy, increase adherence, and meet person-centered goals. Better integration of the multiple systems and disciplines involved in the care of older adults will be essential to implement and disseminate best practices. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:371-380, 2019.

Budgeting for a billion: applying health technology assessment (HTA) for universal health coverage in India.

BACKGROUND: India recently launched the largest universal health coverage scheme in the world to address the gaps in providing healthcare to its population. Health technology assessment (HTA) has been recognised as a tool for setting priorities as the government seeks to increase public health expenditure. This study aims to understand the current situation for healthcare decision-making in India and deliberate on the opportunities for introducing HTA in the country. METHODS: A paper-based questionnaire, adapted from a survey developed by the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI), was administered on the second day of the Topic Selection Workshop that was conducted as part of the HTA Awareness Raising Workshop held in New Delhi on 25-27 July, 2016. Participants were invited to respond to questions covering the need, demand and supply for HTA in their context as well as the role of their organisation vis-à-vis HTA. The response rate for the survey was about 68% with 41 participants having completed the survey. RESULTS: Three quarters of the respondents (71%) stated that the government allocated healthcare resources on the basis of expert opinion. Most respondents indicated reimbursement of individual health technologies and designing a basic health benefit package (93% each) were important health policy areas while medical devices and screening programmes were cited as important technologies (98% and 92%, respectively). More than half of the respondents noted that relevant local data was either not available or was limited. Finally, technical capacity was seen as a strength and a constraint facing organisations. CONCLUSION: The findings from this study shed light on the current situation, the opportunities, including potential topics, and challenges in conducting HTA in India. There are limitations to the study and further studies may need to be conducted to inform the role that HTA will play in the design or implementation of universal health coverage in India.

Strengthening health technology assessment systems in the global south: a comparative analysis of the HTA journeys of China, India and South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Resource allocation in health is universally challenging, but especially so in resource-constrained contexts in the Global South. Pursuing a strategy of evidence-based decision-making and using tools such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA), can help address issues relating to both affordability and equity when allocating resources. Three BRICS and Global South countries, China, India and South Africa have committed to strengthening HTA capacity and developing their domestic HTA systems, with the goal of getting evidence translated into policy. Through assessing and comparing the HTA journey of each country it may be possible to identify common problems and shareable insights. OBJECTIVES: This collaborative paper aimed to share knowledge on strengthening HTA systems to enable enhanced evidence-based decision-making in the Global South by: Identifying common barriers and enablers in three BRICS countries in the Global South; and Exploring how South-South collaboration can strengthen HTA capacity and utilisation for better healthcare decision-making. METHODS: A descriptive and explorative comparative analysis was conducted comprising a Within-Case analysis to produce a narrative of the HTA journey in each country and an Across-Case analysis to explore both knowledge that could be shared and any potential knowledge gaps. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that China, India and South Africa share many barriers to strengthening and developing HTA systems such as: (1) Minimal HTA expertise; (2) Weak health data infrastructure; (3) Rising healthcare costs; (4) Fragmented healthcare systems; and (5) Significant growth in non-communicable diseases. Stakeholder engagement and institutionalisation of HTA were identified as two conducive factors for strengthening HTA systems. CONCLUSION: China, India and South Africa have all committed to establishing robust HTA systems to inform evidence-based priority setting and have experienced similar challenges. Engagement among countries of the Global South can provide a supportive platform to share knowledge that is more applicable and pragmatic.

Identification of publicly available data sources to inform the conduct of Health Technology Assessment in India.

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) provides a globally-accepted and structured approach to synthesising evidence for cost and clinical effectiveness alongside ethical and equity considerations to inform evidence-based priorities. India is one of the most recent countries to formally commit to institutionalising HTA as an integral component of the heath resource allocation decision-making process. The effective conduct of HTA depends on the availability of reliable data.   Methods: We draw from our experience of collecting, synthesizing, and analysing health-related datasets in India and internationally, to highlight the complex requirements for undertaking HTA, and explore the availability of such data in India. We first outlined each of the core data components required for the conduct of HTA, and their availability in India, drawing attention to where data can be accessed, and different ways in which researchers can overcome the challenges of missing or low quality data. Results: We grouped data into the following categories: clinical efficacy; cost; epidemiology; quality of life; service use/consumption; and equity. We identified numerous large local data sources containing epidemiological information. There was a marked absence of other locally-collected data necessary for informing HTA, particularly data relating to cost, service use, and quality of life. Conclusions: The introduction of HTA into the health policy space in India provides an opportunity to comprehensively assess the availability and quality of health data capture across the country. While epidemiological information is routinely collected across India, other data inputs necessary for HTA are not readily available. This poses a significant bottleneck to the efficient generation and deployment of HTA into the health decision space. Overcoming these data gaps by strengthening the routine collection of comprehensive and verifiable health data will have important implications not only for embedding economic analyses into the priority setting process, but for strengthening the health system as a whole.