We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
Economic Evaluations of Guideline-Based Care for Chronic Wounds: a Systematic Review.
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 2018 October
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to review all published economic evaluations of guideline-based care for chronic wounds and to assess how useful these studies are for decision making in health services.
METHODS: Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) were searched on April 16th, 2018. We included studies that evaluated the economic impact and health outcomes associated with implementing evidence-based guidelines as a bundle of care for the prevention and/or treatment of chronic wounds. Information was extracted from each eligible study and organized by the type of chronic wound. The quality of published economic evaluation studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS).
RESULTS: A total of 24 economic evaluation studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 applied decision analytic models. The compliance with the CHEERS checklist ranged between 43 and 83%.
LIMITATIONS: We may have missed some economic evaluation studies despite the use of broad search terms. The quality assessment was conducted based on judgment. Using the CHEERS checklist may reflect the way evaluations were reported rather than conducted.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: We found that guideline-based care may be cost-saving or cost-effective in most circumstances. The quality and usefulness of reviewed studies for decision making were variable. Better information and higher-quality economic evaluations will increase decision makers' confidence to promote guideline-based care.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42017051859.
METHODS: Embase, PubMed, Scopus, Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) were searched on April 16th, 2018. We included studies that evaluated the economic impact and health outcomes associated with implementing evidence-based guidelines as a bundle of care for the prevention and/or treatment of chronic wounds. Information was extracted from each eligible study and organized by the type of chronic wound. The quality of published economic evaluation studies was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS).
RESULTS: A total of 24 economic evaluation studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 12 applied decision analytic models. The compliance with the CHEERS checklist ranged between 43 and 83%.
LIMITATIONS: We may have missed some economic evaluation studies despite the use of broad search terms. The quality assessment was conducted based on judgment. Using the CHEERS checklist may reflect the way evaluations were reported rather than conducted.
CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS OF KEY FINDINGS: We found that guideline-based care may be cost-saving or cost-effective in most circumstances. The quality and usefulness of reviewed studies for decision making were variable. Better information and higher-quality economic evaluations will increase decision makers' confidence to promote guideline-based care.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION NUMBER: PROSPERO CRD42017051859.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app