Multi-criteria Decision Analysis Software in Healthcare Priority Setting: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this systematic review were to identify studies using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) software tools to support health prioritisation processes and describe the technical capabilities of the MCDA software tools identified. METHODS: First, a systematic literature review was conducted in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, EconLit and Cochrane databases in July 2019 to identify studies that have used MCDA software for priority setting in health-related problems. Second, the MCDA software tools found in the review were downloaded (full versions, where freely available, and trial versions otherwise) and tested to extract their key technical characteristics. RESULTS: Nine studies were included, from which seven different software tools, 1000minds®, M-MACBETH, Socio Technical Allocation of Resources (STAR), Strategic Multi-Attribute Ranking Tool (SMART), Visual PROMETHEE, EVIDEM and the Prioritisation Framework, were identified. These software tools differed in terms of the operating systems (including web interface), MCDA technique(s) available for use, visualisation features, and the capability to perform Value for Money (VfM) and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: The use of MCDA software in prioritisation processes has a number of advantages such as inclusion of several types of stakeholders and the ability to analyse a greater number of alternatives and criteria and perform real-time sensitivity analyses. Proprietary software (i.e. software with licensing fees) seemed to have more features than freely available software. However, this field is still developing, with only a few studies where MCDA software was used to support health priority setting and opportunity costs not explicitly captured in many software tools.

Costo-efectividad del diagnóstico etiológico de la cervicitis por c. trachomatis basado en pruebas rápidas comparado con el abordaje sindrómico, en mujeres no gestantes con síntomas de infección del tracto genital inferior / Cost-effectiveness of etiologic diagnosis for C. trachomatis infection based on rapid tests versus syndromic approach in non-pregnant women with symptoms of lower genital tract infection

Objetivo: estimar la razón costo-efectividad del diagnóstico etiológico con pruebas rápidas para la cervicitis por C. trachomatis frente al diagnóstico sindrómico, en mujeres no gestantes con síntomas de infección del tracto genital inferior en Colombia. Materiales y métodos: se construyó un árbol de decisión para determinar la razón de costo-efectividad de la aproximación etiológica con las pruebas rápidas Acon®Plate, Acon®Duo y QuickVue® para la detección de C. trachomatis comparada con el diagnóstico sindrómico. La perspectiva fue la del sistema de salud colombiano incluyendo todos los costos médicos directos. El horizonte de tiempo fue de 15 días, ya que la unidad de resultado fue el número de casos correctamente identificados (número de verdaderos positivos y verdaderos negativos). Las características operativas de las pruebas se obtuvieron en un estudio de corte transversal diseñado y conducido para este propósito. Resultados: la alternativa más costosa y más efectiva fue QuickVue® seguida de Acon®Plate y del abordaje sindrómico. Acon®Duo fue una estrategia dominada. La razón de costo-efectividad incremental de QuickVue®, comparada con Acon®Plate, fue de $ 430.671; la de Acon®Plate, comparada con el abordaje sindrómico, fue de $ 79.747. Conclusión: si la disponibilidad a pagar (DAP) por un caso correctamente identificado adicional es mayor que $ 430.671, QuickVue® sería la mejor alternativa en términos de costo-efectividad; de otro lado, si la DAP está entre $ 79.747 y $ 430.671, Acon®Plate sería la alternativa costo-efectiva. Finalmente, si la DAP es menor que $ 79.747, el abordaje sindrómico sería la mejor alternativa en términos de costo-efectividad.

Objective: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of etiological approach with rapid tests for C. trachomatis cervicitis versus syndromic diagnosis, in non-pregnant women with symptoms of lower genital tract infection in Colombia. Materials and methods: A decision tree was developed for determining the cost-effectiveness ratio of the aetiological approach using the Acon®Plate, Acon®Duo and QuickVue® quick tests for the detection of C. trachomatis, compared with the syndromic diagnosis. The perspective was that of the Colombian healthcare system, including medical direct costs. The time period was 15 days, considering that the outcome unit was the number of cases identified correctly (number of true positives and true negatives). The operational characteristics of the tests were derived from a cross-sectional study designed and conducted for that specific purpose. Results: The more costly and effective option was QuickVue®, followed by Acon®Plate and the syndromic approach. Acon®Duo was a dominated strategy. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for QuickVue® compared with Acon®Plate was $430.671, and that of Acon®Plate compared with the syndromic approach was $79.747. Conclusion: If the willingness to pay (WTP) for an additional case that is correctly identified is greater than $430.671, QuickVue® would be the best option in cost-effectiveness terms. On the other hand, if the WTP is between $79.747 and $430.671, Acon®Plate would be the cost-effective strategy. Finally, if the WTP is less than $79.747, the syndromic approach would be the best option in cost-effectiveness terms.

[18FDG-PET/CT cost-effectiveness compared to CT at the end of treatment in pediatric Hodgkin's lymphoma patients]. / Costo-efectividad de 18FDG-PET/CT vs CT al final del tratamiento en pacientes pediátricos con Linfoma Hodgkin.

OBJECTIVE: Estimating the cost-effectiveness of 18FDG-PET/CT (positron emission tomography) compared to computer tomography (CT) followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case at the end of treatment in Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) patients under 18 years-old. METHODS: A decision tree was built for comparing 18FDG-PET/CT to CT followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case in detecting residual lesions; outcome was measured in life years gained (LYG). The cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated; the threshold was 3 times the per capita GDP per LYG. Values were expressed in Colombian pesos for 2010 (1 US dollar=$ 1,897.89) and submitted to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. RESULTS: Assuming a difference of 13 months in true positives' life expectancy compared to that for false negatives, the cost of an additional LYG with 18FDG-PET/CT compared to CT followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case when evaluating the end of pediatric HL patients' treatment was $ 34,508,590 (COP). CONCLUSION: If differential life-expectancy between true positives and false negatives is at least 1.03 years, then using 18FDG-PET/CT for evaluating the end of HL pediatric patients' therapy is a cost-effective strategy for Colombia.

Costo-efectividad de 18FDG-PET/CT vs CT al final del tratamiento en pacientes pediátricos con Linfoma Hodgkin / 18FDG-PET/CT cost-effectiveness compared to CT at the end of treatment in pediatric Hodgkin's lymphoma patients

Objetivo Estimar la costo-efectividad de 18FDG-PET/CT comparado con CT seguido de 18FDG-PET/CT como prueba confirmatoria de un caso positivo en la evaluación al final del tratamiento en pacientes menores de 18 años con Linfoma Hodgkin (LH). Métodos Se construyó un árbol de decisión donde se comparó el uso de 18FDG-PET/CT con CT seguido de 18FDG-PET/CT como prueba confirmatoria de un caso positivo en la detección de lesión residual. El resultado se midió en Años de Vida Ganados (AVG). Se calculó la razón de costo-efectividad incremental. Se utilizó como umbral 3 veces el PIB per cápita por año AVG. Valores expresados en pesos colombianos de 2010 (1 US dólar = $ 1 897,89) Se realizaron análisis de sensibilidad univariados, bivariados y probabilísticos. Resultados Suponiendo un diferencial en AVG entre verdaderos positivos y falsos negativos de 13 meses, el costo de un AVG adicional con 18FDG-PET/CT comparado con CT seguido de 18FDG-PET/CT como prueba confirmatoria de un caso positivo en la evaluación al final del tratamiento en pacientes pediátricos con LH fue $ 34 508 590. Conclusión Si el diferencial de esperanza de vida entre verdaderos positivos y falsos negativos es de al menos un 1,03 años, el uso de 18FDG-PET/CT en la evaluación al final del tratamiento de pacientes pediátricos con LH, es una estrategia costo-efectiva para Colombia.

Objective Estimating the cost-effectiveness of 18FDG-PET/CT (positron emission tomography) compared to computer tomography (CT) followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case at the end of treatment in Hodgkin's lymphoma (HL) patients under 18 years-old. Methods A decision tree was built for comparing 18FDG-PET/CT to CT followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case in detecting residual lesions; outcome was measured in life years gained (LYG). The cost-effectiveness ratio was calculated; the threshold was 3 times the per capita GDP per LYG. Values were expressed in Colombian pesos for 2010 (1 US dollar=$ 1,897.89) and submitted to deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis. Results Assuming a difference of 13 months in true positives' life expectancy compared to that for false negatives, the cost of an additional LYG with 18FDG-PET/CT compared to CT followed by 18FDG-PET/CT as a confirmatory test for a positive case when evaluating the end of pediatric HL patients' treatment was $ 34,508,590 (COP). Conclusion If differential life-expectancy between true positives and false negatives is at least 1.03 years, then using 18FDG-PET/CT for evaluating the end of HL pediatric patients' therapy is a cost-effective strategy for Colombia.