Application of economic evidence in health technology assessment and decision-making for the allocation of health resources in Latin America: Seven key topics and a preliminary proposal for implementation

This technical note1 discusses the application of economic evidence in health technology assessments for decision-making on the allocation of health resources. There is already recognition in Latin America that the economic dimensions of health interventions, such as cost-effectiveness and budgetary impact, are critical dimensions that should always be considered when making decisions about the coverage or inclusion of technologies in benefits packages. However, there are still barriers and constraints that prevent the evaluation of economic evidence in the region from being an integral part of all decision- making processes, with serious implications for the equity and efficiency with which health resources are allocated. The purpose of this technical note is to provide elements and tools that contribute, in a practical way, to overcoming these barriers, answering the questions asked by health systems that are beginning to apply economic evidence in their evaluation and decision-making processes. How do we know if a technology or intervention is cost-effective in our context? What cost-effectiveness threshold should be applied? How might non-economic criteria and dimensions influence our cost-effectiveness threshold? What limit should be considered when a technology implies a high budgetary impact in a particular health system? Given the existing difficulties in generating local economic evidence, what can the economic evidence generated in other jurisdictions tell us? How can economic evidence be taken into account in a fragmented health system? Consideration of these aspects is key to ensuring fairer, more transparent allocation of health resources and thus achieving more efficient and equitable health systems in Latin America

A systematic review of value criteria for next-generation sequencing/ comprehensive genomic profiling to inform value framework development

Objectives: To comprehensively identify and map an exhaustive list of value criteria for the assessment of next-generation sequencing/comprehensive genomic profiling (NGS/CGP), to be used as an aid in decision making. Methods: We conducted a systematic review to identify existing value frameworks (VFs) applicable to any type of healthcare technology. VFs and criteria were mapped to a previously published Latin American (LA) VF to harmonize definitions and identify additional criteria and or subcriteria. Based on this analysis, we extracted a comprehensive, evidence-based list of criteria and subcriteria to be considered in the design of a NGS/CGP VF. Results: A total of 42 additional VFs were compared with the LA VF, 88% were developed in high-income countries, 30% targeted genomic testing, and 16% specifically targeted oncology. A total of 242 criteria and subcriteria were extracted; 227 (94%) were fully/partially included in the LA VF; and 15 (6%) were new. Clinical benefit and economic aspects were the most common criteria. VFs oriented to genomic testing showed significant overlap with other VFs. Considering all criteria and subcriteria, a total of 18 criteria and 36 individual subcriteria were identified. Conclusions: Our study provides an evidence-based set of criteria and subcriteria for healthcare decision making useful for NGS/CGP as well as other health technologies. The resulting list can be beneficial to inform decision making and will serve as a foundation to co-create a multistakeholder NGS/CGP VF that is aligned with the needs and values of health systems and could help to improve patient access to high-value technologies

Determining the efficiency path to universal health coverage : cost-effectiveness thresholds for 174 countries based on growth in life expectancy and health expenditures

BACKGROUND: Assessment of the efficiency of interventions is paramount to achieving equitable health-care systems. One key barrier to the widespread use of economic evaluations in resource allocation decisions is the absence of a widely accepted method to define cost-effectiveness thresholds to judge whether an intervention is cost-effective in a particular jurisdiction. We aimed to develop a method to estimate cost-effectiveness thresholds on the basis of health expenditures per capita and life expectancy at birth and empirically derive these thresholds for 174 countries. METHODS: We developed a conceptual framework to assess how the adoption and coverage of new interventions with a given incremental cost-effectiveness ratio will affect the rate of increase of health expenditures per capita and life expectancy at the population level. The cost-effectiveness threshold can be derived so that the effect of new interventions on the evolution of life expectancy and health expenditure per capita is set within predefined goals. To provide guidance on cost-effectiveness thresholds and secular trends for 174 countries, we projected country-level health expenditure per capita and life expectancy increases by income level based on World Bank data for the period 2010-19. FINDINGS: Cost-effectiveness thresholds per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) ranged between US$87 (Democratic Republic of the Congo) and$95 958 (USA) and were less than 0·5 gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in 96% of low-income countries, 76% of lower-middle-income countries, 31% of upper-middle-income countries, and 26% of high-income countries. Cost-effectiveness thresholds per QALY were less than 1 GDP per capita in 168 (97%) of the 174 countries. Cost-effectiveness thresholds per life-year ranged between $78 and$80 529 and between 0·12 and 1·24 GDP per capita, and were less than 1 GDP per capita in 171 (98%) countries. INTERPRETATION: This approach, based on widely available data, can provide a useful reference for countries using economic evaluations to inform resource-allocation decisions and can enrich international efforts to estimate cost-effectiveness thresholds. Our results show lower thresholds than those currently in use in many countries. FUNDING: Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS)

Quality of life in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients requiring insulin treatment in Buenos Aires, Argentina: a cross-sectional study

Background: Decision-makers have begun to recognize Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) as an important and measurable outcome of healthcare interventions; and HRQoL data is increasingly being used by policy-makers to prioritize health resources. Our objective was to measure HRQoL in a group of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients receiving insulin treatment in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study of patients with T2DM over 21 years of age, treated with either Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin or Insulin Glargine (IG), who had not changed their baseline schedule in the last 6 months. The recruitment was during 2006–7 in nine private diabetes specialists’ offices in Buenos Aires, Argentina. A standardized diabetes-specific HRQoL questionnaire, the Audit of Diabetes Dependent Quality of Life (ADDQoL), was used. Results: A total of 183 patients were included (93 receiving NPH and 90 receiving IG). The mean QoL score was: 0.98 (SD: 0.89) and the diabetes specific QoL was: -1.49 (SD: 0.90). T2DM had a negative impact on HRQoL with a mean Average Weighted Impact (AWI) score on QoL of -1.77 (SD: 1.58). The greatest negative impact was observed for domains: ‘ worries about the future’ , ‘ freedom to eat’ , ‘ living conditions ’, ‘ sex life’ , and ‘ family life’ . The mean AWI score was -1.71 (SD: 1.48) in patients treated with IG and -1.85 (SD: 1.68) in patients receiving NPH, this difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion: The ADDQoL questionnaire is a tool that can be used in Argentina to measure the QoL of patients with diabetes when evaluating diabetes care programs. The scores of QoL in our selected population did not differ from those reported in high-income countries. We expect that the results of this study will increase healthcare providers’ awareness of patients’ perceived QoL and help to overcome the barriers that delay insulin treatment; mainly clinical inertia and patient resistanc

Challenges faced in transferring economic evaluations to middle income countries

BACKGROUND: Decision makers in middle income countries are using economic evaluations (EEs) in pricing and reimbursement decisions for pharmaceuticals. However, whilst many of these jurisdictions have local submission guidelines and local expertise, the studies themselves often use economic models developed elsewhere and elements of data from countries other than the jurisdiction concerned. The objectives of this study were to describe the current situation and to assess the challenges faced by decision makers in transferring data and analyses from other jurisdictions. METHODS: Experienced health service researchers in each region conducted an interview survey of representatives of decision making bodies from jurisdictions in Asia, Central and Eastern Europe, and Latin America that had at least one year’s experience of using EEs. RESULTS: Representatives of the relevant organizations in 12 countries were interviewed. All 12 jurisdictions had developed official guidelines for the conduct of EEs. All but one of the organizations evaluated studies submitted to them, but 9 also conducted studies and 7 commissioned them. Nine of the organizations stated that, in evaluating EEs submitted to them, they had consulted a study performed in a different jurisdiction. Data on relevant treatment effect was generally considered more transferable than those on prices/unit costs. Views on the transferability of epidemiological data, data on resource use and health state preference values were more mixed. Eight of the respondents stated that analyses submitted to them had used models developed in other jurisdictions. Four of the organizations had a policy requiring models to be adapted to reflect local circumstances. The main obstacles to transferring EEs were the different patterns of care or wealth of the developed countries from which most economic evaluations originate. CONCLUSIONS: In middle income countries it is commonplace to deal with the issue of transferring analyses or data from other jurisdictions. Decision makers in these countries face several challenges, mainly due to differences in current standard of care, practice patterns or GDP between the developed countries where the majority of the studies are conducted and their own jurisdiction

A cost-effectiveness analysis of a 10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in children in six Latin American countries.

BACKGROUND: A recently developed 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable H influenzae protein D-conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV) is expected to afford protection against more than two thirds of isolates causing IPD in children in Latin America, and also against acute otitis media caused by both Spn and NTHi. The objective of this study is to assess the cost-effectiveness of PHiD-CV in comparison to non-vaccination in children under 10 years of age in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. METHODS: We used a static, deterministic, compartmental simulation model. The dosing regimen considered included three vaccine doses (at 2 months, 4 months and 6 months) and a booster dose (at 13 months) (3 + 1 schedule). Model outcomes included number of cases prevented, deaths averted, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained and costs. Discount for costs and benefits of long term sequelae was done at 3.5%, and currency reported in 2008-2009 U$S varying between countries. RESULTS: The largest effect in case prevention was observed in pneumococcal meningitis (from 27$ Dollars per QALY gained. Results were robust in the sensitivity analysis, and scenarios with indirect costs affected results more than those with herd immunity. CONCLUSIONS: The incorporation of the 10-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine into routine infant immunization programs in Latin American countries could be a cost-effective strategy to improve infant population health in the region

Lives Versus Livelihoods: The Epidemiological, Social, And Economic Impact Of COVID-19 In Latin America And The Caribbean

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Latin American and Caribbean countries implemented stringent public health and social measures that disrupted economic and social activities. This study used an integrated model to evaluate the epidemiological, economic, and social trade-offs in Argentina, Brazil, Jamaica, and Mexico throughout 2021. Argentina and Mexico displayed a higher gross domestic product (GDP) loss and lower deaths per million compared with Brazil. The magnitude of the trade-offs differed across countries. Reducing GDP loss at the margin by 1 percent would have increased daily deaths by 0.5 per million in Argentina but only 0.3 per million in Brazil. We observed an increase in poverty rates related to the stringency of public health and social measures but no significant income-loss differences by sex. Our results indicate that the economic impact of COVID-19 was uneven across countries as a result of different pandemic trajectories, public health and social measures, and vaccination uptake, as well as socioeconomic differences and fiscal responses. Policy makers need to be informed about the trade-offs to make strategic decisions to save lives and livelihoods