Mickaël Hiligsmann1, Cyrus Cooper2, Francis Guillemin3, Marc C Hochberg4, Peter Tugwell5, Nigel Arden6, Francis Berenbaum7, Maarten Boers8, Annelies Boonen9, Jaime C Branco10, Brandi Maria-Luisa11, Olivier Bruyère12, Andrea Gasparik13, John A Kanis14, Tore K Kvien15, Johanne Martel-Pelletier16, Jean-Pierre Pelletier16, Rafael Pinedo-Villanueva6, Daniel Pinto17, Susanne Reiter-Niesert18, René Rizzoli19, Lucio C Rovati20, Johan L Severens21, Stuart Silverman22, Jean-Yves Reginster12. 1. Department of Health Services Research, School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: m.hiligsmann@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK; NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 3. Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France; Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. 4. Division of Rheumatology & Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center, VA Maryland Health Care System, Baltimore, MD. 5. Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. 6. NIHR Musculoskeletal Biomedical Research Unit, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK. 7. University of Paris 06-INSERM UMR-S 938, Paris, France; Department of Rheumatology, AP-HP Saint-Antoine Hospital, Paris, France. 8. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Department of Rheumatology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 9. Division of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Center, The Netherlands; School for Public Health and Primary Care (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, The Netherlands. 10. CEDOC, Bayamon, Puerto Rico; Department of Rheumatology, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal; CHLO, EPE-Hospital Egas Moniz, Lisbon, Portugal. 11. Department of Internal Medicine, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 12. Department of Public Health, Epidemiology and Health Economics, University of Liege, Liege, Belgium. 13. Department of Public Health and Health Management, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Tirgu Mures, Romania. 14. WHO Collaborating Centre for Metabolic Bone Diseases, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK. 15. Department of Rheumatology, Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. 16. Osteoarthritis Research Unit, University of Montreal Hospital Research Centre (CRCHUM), Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 17. Department of Physical Therapy and Human Movement Sciences/Center for Healthcare Studies, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. 18. Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM), Germany. 19. Service of Bone Diseases, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland. 20. Clinical Research Unit, Rottapharm/Madaus, Monza, Italy. 21. Institute of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 22. Cedars-Sinai Bone Center of Excellence, UCLA School of Medicine, OMC Clinical Research Center, Beverly Hills, CA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: General recommendations for a reference case for economic studies in rheumatic diseases were published in 2002 in an initiative to improve the comparability of cost-effectiveness studies in the field. Since then, economic evaluations in osteoarthritis (OA) continue to show considerable heterogeneity in methodological approach. OBJECTIVES: To develop a reference case specific for economic studies in OA, including the standard optimal care, with which to judge new pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. METHODS: Four subgroups of an ESCEO expert working group on economic assessments (13 experts representing diverse aspects of clinical research and/or economic evaluations) were charged with producing lists of recommendations that would potentially improve the comparability of economic analyses in OA: outcome measures, comparators, costs and methodology. These proposals were discussed and refined during a face-to-face meeting in 2013. They are presented here in the format of the recommendations of the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, so that an initiative on economic analysis methodology might be consolidated with an initiative on reporting standards. RESULTS: Overall, three distinct reference cases are proposed, one for each hand, knee and hip OA; with diagnostic variations in the first two, giving rise to different treatment options: interphalangeal or thumb-based disease for hand OA and the presence or absence of joint malalignment for knee OA. A set of management strategies is proposed, which should be further evaluated to help establish a consensus on the "standard optimal care" in each proposed reference case. The recommendations on outcome measures, cost itemisation and methodological approaches are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: The ESCEO group proposes a set of disease-specific recommendations on the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in OA that could help the standardisation and comparability of studies that evaluate therapeutic strategies of OA in terms of costs and effectiveness.
BACKGROUND: General recommendations for a reference case for economic studies in rheumatic diseases were published in 2002 in an initiative to improve the comparability of cost-effectiveness studies in the field. Since then, economic evaluations in osteoarthritis (OA) continue to show considerable heterogeneity in methodological approach. OBJECTIVES: To develop a reference case specific for economic studies in OA, including the standard optimal care, with which to judge new pharmacologic and non-pharmacologic interventions. METHODS: Four subgroups of an ESCEO expert working group on economic assessments (13 experts representing diverse aspects of clinical research and/or economic evaluations) were charged with producing lists of recommendations that would potentially improve the comparability of economic analyses in OA: outcome measures, comparators, costs and methodology. These proposals were discussed and refined during a face-to-face meeting in 2013. They are presented here in the format of the recommendations of the recently published Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) statement, so that an initiative on economic analysis methodology might be consolidated with an initiative on reporting standards. RESULTS: Overall, three distinct reference cases are proposed, one for each hand, knee and hip OA; with diagnostic variations in the first two, giving rise to different treatment options: interphalangeal or thumb-based disease for hand OA and the presence or absence of joint malalignment for knee OA. A set of management strategies is proposed, which should be further evaluated to help establish a consensus on the "standard optimal care" in each proposed reference case. The recommendations on outcome measures, cost itemisation and methodological approaches are also provided. CONCLUSIONS: The ESCEO group proposes a set of disease-specific recommendations on the conduct and reporting of economic evaluations in OA that could help the standardisation and comparability of studies that evaluate therapeutic strategies of OA in terms of costs and effectiveness.
Authors: Jos Verbeek; Christina Mischke; Rachel Robinson; Sharea Ijaz; Paul Kuijer; Arthur Kievit; Anneli Ojajärvi; Kaisa Neuvonen Journal: Saf Health Work Date: 2017-02-22
Authors: Charlotte Beaudart; Eugène McCloskey; Olivier Bruyère; Matteo Cesari; Yves Rolland; René Rizzoli; Islène Araujo de Carvalho; Jotheeswaran Amuthavalli Thiyagarajan; Ivan Bautmans; Marie-Claude Bertière; Maria Luisa Brandi; Nasser M Al-Daghri; Nansa Burlet; Etienne Cavalier; Francesca Cerreta; Antonio Cherubini; Roger Fielding; Evelien Gielen; Francesco Landi; Jean Petermans; Jean-Yves Reginster; Marjolein Visser; John Kanis; Cyrus Cooper Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2016-10-05 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: M Hiligsmann; J-Y Reginster; A N A Tosteson; S V Bukata; K G Saag; D T Gold; P Halbout; F Jiwa; E M Lewiecki; D Pinto; J D Adachi; N Al-Daghri; O Bruyère; M Chandran; C Cooper; N C Harvey; T A Einhorn; J A Kanis; D L Kendler; O D Messina; R Rizzoli; L Si; S Silverman Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 4.507