Publication: [Eleven years of economic evaluations of medical devices by the Spanish Network of Assessment Agencies. Methodological quality and cost-utility impact].
dc.contributor.author | Giménez, Emmanuel | |
dc.contributor.author | García-Pérez, Lidia | |
dc.contributor.author | Márquez, Sergio | |
dc.contributor.author | Gutiérrez, María Asun | |
dc.contributor.author | Bayón, Juan Carlos | |
dc.contributor.author | Espallargues, Mireia | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-02-08T14:50:49Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-02-08T14:50:49Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2019-10-25 | |
dc.description.abstract | To analyse the quality and impact of cost-utility evaluations of medical devices carried out by the Spanish Network of Assessment Agencies (RedETS). The cost-utility evaluations of medical devices were identified by searching the evaluation reports of the RedETS website database (2006-2016). Quality and its impact were evaluated with a RedETS quality checklist, comparing cost-utility results and inclusion in the portfolio of common services of the National Health System. The portfolio inclusion status was analysed considering whether the cost-effectiveness incremental ratio was or was not less than €25,000/quality adjusted life years. 25 cost-utility evaluations of medical devices were found (12 cost-utility, 10 cost-effectiveness and 3 both). Fifteen selected cost-utility studies with 19 cost-utility ratios met at least 18 of 25 verification criteria. Also, 12 of the 15 studies met 19 of the 25 criteria. On the impact, in 6 out of the 19 results, the product was included in the portfolio even though the ratio exceeded €25,000/quality adjusted life years. There are three cases undergoing a re-evaluation process, another case being reconsidered once the efficacy-safety of new devices has been reported and in two cases the portfolio states that protocols are required. Most of the cost-utility evaluations of medical devices published by RedETS fulfil most of the items on the checklist and, therefore, were thorough. These cost-utility evaluations of medical devices are consistent with the decision-making framework to efficiently manage the National Health System portfolio. | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1016/j.gaceta.2019.06.010 | |
dc.identifier.essn | 1578-1283 | |
dc.identifier.pmid | 31669165 | |
dc.identifier.unpaywallURL | https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2019.06.010 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10668/15577 | |
dc.issue.number | 4 | |
dc.journal.title | Gaceta sanitaria | |
dc.journal.titleabbreviation | Gac Sanit | |
dc.language.iso | es | |
dc.organization | Agencia de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias de Andalucía-AETSA | |
dc.organization | AETSA – Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias | |
dc.page.number | 326-333 | |
dc.pubmedtype | Journal Article | |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International | |
dc.rights.accessRights | open access | |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ | |
dc.subject | Cartera común | |
dc.subject | Cost-effectiveness | |
dc.subject | Coste-efectividad | |
dc.subject | Economic evaluation | |
dc.subject | Efficiency | |
dc.subject | Eficiencia | |
dc.subject | Evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias | |
dc.subject | Evaluación económica | |
dc.subject | Health technology assessment | |
dc.subject | Medical devices | |
dc.subject | National portfolio | |
dc.subject | Productos sanitarios | |
dc.subject.mesh | Cost-Benefit Analysis | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Organizations | |
dc.subject.mesh | Quality-Adjusted Life Years | |
dc.title | [Eleven years of economic evaluations of medical devices by the Spanish Network of Assessment Agencies. Methodological quality and cost-utility impact]. | |
dc.title.alternative | Once años de evaluaciones económicas de productos sanitarios en la Red de Agencias de Evaluación. Calidad metodológica e impacto del coste-utilidad. | |
dc.type | research article | |
dc.type.hasVersion | VoR | |
dc.volume.number | 34 | |
dspace.entity.type | Publication |