Abstract
Background
Health economic parameters are increasingly considered as variables in health care decisions, but decision makers are interested in country-specific evaluations. However, a large number of studies are performed in foreign countries or in a multinational setting, which limits the transferability to a single nation’s context.
Objective
The present analysis summarises several of the most common international methods for generating health economic analyses based on clinical studies from different settings.
Methods
A narrative literature review was performed to identify potential reasons for limited transferability of health economic evaluation results from one country to another. Based on these results, we searched the methodological literature for analytic approaches to handle the restrictions. Additionally we describe the possibility of transferring foreign economic study results to the country of interest by matching trial data with routine data of national databases.
Results
The main factors for limited transferability of health economic findings were found in country-specific differences in resource consumption and the resulting costs. These differences are affected by a number of influencing cofactors (demography, epidemiology and individual patient’s factors) and the overall health care system structures (e.g. payment systems, health provider incentives). However, despite the limitations country-specific health economic assessments could be realised using the pooled/split analyses approach, some statistical approaches and modelling approaches.
Conclusion
A variety of methods for identifying and adjusting country-specific differences in costs, effects and cost-effectiveness was established during the past decades. Multinational studies will continue to play a crucial role in the evaluation of cost-effectiveness at national levels. It seems likely that the growing interest in multinational studies will lead to continued developments in adaptation methods.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Asplund K, Ashburner S, Cargill K, Hux M, Lees K, Drummond M, et al (2003) Health care resource use and stroke outcome. Multinational comparisons within the GAIN International trial. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 19(2):267–277
Bastian H, Bender R, Ernst AS, Kaiser T, Kirchner H, Kolominsky-Rabas P, Lange S, Sawicki PT, Weber M (2006) Methoden. Köln: Institut für Qualität und Wirtschaftlichkeit im Gesundheitswesen (IQWiG). Report No.: version 2.0
Bryan S, Brown J (1998) Extrapolation of cost-effectiveness information to local settings. J Health Serv Res Policy 3(2):108–112
Bytzer P (1999) Cost-effectiveness of gastroscopy. Ital J Gastroenterol Hepatol 31(8):749–760
Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, Briggs A, Akehurst R, Buxton M, Brazier J, O’Hagan T (2005) Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for NICE technology assessment: not an optional extra. Health Econ 14(4):339–347
Cook JR, Drummond M, Glick H, Heyse JF (2003) Assessing the appropriateness of combining economic data from multinational clinical trials. Stat Med 22(12):1955–1976
Demol P, Weihrauch TR (1997) Multi-national clinical therapy studies. Design, management and costs (in German). Med Klin (Munich) 92(2):117–123
Drummond MF, Pang F (2001) Transferability of economic evaluation results. In: Drummond MF, McGuire A (eds) Economic evaluation in health care: merging theory with practice. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Drummond MF, O’Brien BJ, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW (1997) Methods for economic evaluation of health care programmes, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Grieve R, Nixon R, Thompson SG, Normand C (2005) Using multilevel models for assessing the variability of multinational resource use and cost data. Health Econ 14(2):185–196
Halliday RG, Darba J (2003) Cost data assessment in multinational economic evaluations: some theory and review of published studies. Appl Health Econ Health Policy 2(3):149–155
Hay J, Jackson J (1999) Panel 2: methodological issues in conducting pharmacoeconomic evaluations–modeling studies. Value Health 2(2):78–81
Heyland DK, Kernerman P, Gafni A, Cook DJ (1996) Economic evaluations in the critical care literature: do they help us improve the efficiency of our unit? Crit Care Med 24(9):1591–1598
Hjelmgren J, Berggren F, Andersson F (2001) Health economic guidelines—similarities, differences and some implications. Value Health 4(3):225–250
Jönsson B, Weinstein MC (1997) Economic evaluation alongside multinational clinical trials. Study considerations for GUSTO IIb. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 13(1):49–58
Kaplan GA, Keil JE (1993) Socioeconomic factors and cardiovascular disease: a review of the literature. Circulation 88(4 Pt 1):1973–1998
Koopmanschap MA, Touw KC, Rutten FF (2001) Analysis of costs and cost-effectiveness in multinational trials. Health Policy 58(2):175–186
Manca A, Willan AR (2006) ‘Lost in translation’: accounting for between-country differences in the analysis of multinational cost-effectiveness data. Pharmacoeconomics 24(11):1101–1119
Menzin J, Oster G, Davies L, Drummond MF, Greiner W, Lucioni C, Merot JL, Rossi F, vd Schulenburg JG, Souêtre E (1996) A multinational economic evaluation of rhDNase in the treatment of cystic fibrosis. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 12(1):52–61
Moayyedi P (2007) The health economics of Helicobacter pylori infection. Best Pract Res Clin Gastroenterol 21(2):347–361
O’Brien BJ (1997) A tale of two (or more) cities: geographic transferability of pharmacoeconomic data. Am J Manag Care 3(Suppl):S33–S39
Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care (1994) Ontario guidelines for economic analysis of pharmaceutical products. Queen’s Printer for Ontario
Pang F (2002) Design, analysis and presentation of multinational economic studies: the need for guidance. Pharmacoeconomics 20(2):75–90
Pinto EM, Willan AR, O’Brien BJ (2005) Cost-effectiveness analysis for multinational clinical trials. Stat Med 24(13):1965–1982
Reed SD, Anstrom KJ, Bakhai A, Briggs AH, Califf RM, Cohen DJ, Drummond MF, Glick HA, Gnanasakthy A, Hlatky MA et al (2005) Conducting economic evaluations alongside multinational clinical trials: toward a research consensus. Am Heart J 149(3):434–443
Schöffski O, Graf von der Schulenburg JM (2007) Die Standardisierung der Methodik: Guidelines. In: Gesundheitsökonomische Evaluationen, 3 ed. Spinger, Berlin, pp 471–489
Sculpher MJ, Pang FS, Manca A, Drummond MF, Golder S, Urdahl H, Davis LM, Eastwood A (2004) Generalisability in economic evaluation studies in healthcare: a review and case studies. Health Technol Assess 8(49):iii–iv
Siebert U (2003) When should decision-analytic modeling be used in the economic evaluation of health care? Eur J Health Econ 4:143–150
Thompson SG, Nixon RM, Grieve R (2006) Addressing the issues that arise in analysing multicentre cost data, with application to a multinational study. J Health Econ 25(6):1015–1028
Willan AR, Pinto EM, O’Brien BJ, Kaul P, Goeree R, Lynd L, Armstrong PW (2005) Country specific cost comparisons from multinational clinical trials using empirical Bayesian shrinkage estimation: the Canadian ASSENT-3 economic analysis. Health Econ 14(4):327–338
Willke RJ, Glick HA, Polsky D, Schulman K (1998) Estimating country-specific cost-effectiveness from multinational clinical trials. Health Econ 7(6):481–493
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Sanofis-Aventis Germany GmbH for supporting this investigation by a non-restrictive research contribution.
Conflict of interest
The authors confirm that there are no relevant associations that might pose a conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Reinhold, T., Brüggenjürgen, B., Schlander, M. et al. Economic analysis based on multinational studies: methods for adapting findings to national contexts. J Public Health 18, 327–335 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-010-0315-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-010-0315-0