A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation Studies of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in the Middle East and North Africa
Issued Date
2022-05-01
Resource Type
ISSN
11755652
eISSN
11791896
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85121416981
Journal Title
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Volume
20
Issue
3
Start Page
315
End Page
335
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Vol.20 No.3 (2022) , 315-335
Suggested Citation
Nagi M.A., Dewi P.E.N., Thavorncharoensap M., Sangroongruangsri S. A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation Studies of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in the Middle East and North Africa. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Vol.20 No.3 (2022) , 315-335. 335. doi:10.1007/s40258-021-00703-y Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/84528
Title
A Systematic Review on Economic Evaluation Studies of Diagnostic and Therapeutic Interventions in the Middle East and North Africa
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Introduction: Due to the increase in healthcare budget constraint, economic evaluation (EE) evidence is increasingly required to inform resource allocation decisions. This study aimed to systematically review quantity, characteristics, and quality of full EE studies on diagnostic and therapeutic interventions conducted in 26 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries. Methods: PubMed and Scopus databases were comprehensively searched to identify the published EE studies in the MENA region. The quality of reviewed studies was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist. Results: The search identified 69 studies. The cost-utility approach was adopted in 49 studies (71 %). More than half (38 studies; 55 %) were conducted in Iran and Turkey. Sixteen countries (62 %) did not have any EE studies. The most frequently analyzed therapeutic areas were infectious diseases (19 studies; 28 %), cardiovascular diseases (11 studies; 16 %), and malignancies (10 studies; 14 %). Ten studies (14 %), 46 (67 %), 12 (17 %), and 1 study (1 %) were classified as excellent, high, moderate, and poor quality, respectively. The mean of items reported was 85.10 % (standard deviation 13.32 %). Characterizing heterogeneity, measurement of effectiveness, time horizon, and discount rate were missed in 21 (60 %), 22 (32 %), 20 (29 %) and 15 (25 %) studies, respectively. Data on effectiveness and utility relied primarily on studies conducted outside the region. Conclusions: The quantity of EE studies in the MENA region remains low; however, overall quality is high to excellent. The availability of local data, capacity building, and national guidelines are vital to improve both the quantity and quality of EE studies in the region.