Multiplier Effects and Compensation Mechanisms for Inclusion in Health Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review.
Journal
PharmacoEconomics
ISSN: 1179-2027
Titre abrégé: Pharmacoeconomics
Pays: New Zealand
ID NLM: 9212404
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
accepted:
15
07
2023
medline:
28
8
2023
pubmed:
18
8
2023
entrez:
17
8
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may affect productivity losses due to illness, disability, or premature death of individuals. Hence, they are important in estimating productivity losses and productivity costs in the context of economic evaluations of health interventions. This paper presents a systematic literature review of papers focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects, as well as whether and how they are included in health economic evaluations. The systematic literature search was performed covering EconLit and PubMed. A data-extraction form was developed focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects. A total of 26 studies were included. Of these, 15 were empirical studies, three studies were methodological studies, two studies combined methodological research with empirical research, four were critical reviews, one study was a critical review combined with methodological research, and one study was a cost-benefit analysis. No uniform definition of compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects was identified. The terminology used to describe compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects varied as well. While the included studies suggest that both multipliers as well as compensation mechanisms substantially impact productivity cost estimates, the available evidence is scarce. Moreover, the generalizability as well as validity of assumptions underlying the calculations are unclear. Available measurement methods for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects differ in approaches and are hardly validated. While our review suggests that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may have a significant impact on productivity losses and costs, much remains unclear about their features, valid measurement, and correct valuation. This hampers their current inclusion in economic evaluation, and therefore, more research into both phenomena remains warranted.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may affect productivity losses due to illness, disability, or premature death of individuals. Hence, they are important in estimating productivity losses and productivity costs in the context of economic evaluations of health interventions. This paper presents a systematic literature review of papers focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects, as well as whether and how they are included in health economic evaluations.
METHODS
The systematic literature search was performed covering EconLit and PubMed. A data-extraction form was developed focusing on compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects.
RESULTS
A total of 26 studies were included. Of these, 15 were empirical studies, three studies were methodological studies, two studies combined methodological research with empirical research, four were critical reviews, one study was a critical review combined with methodological research, and one study was a cost-benefit analysis. No uniform definition of compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects was identified. The terminology used to describe compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects varied as well. While the included studies suggest that both multipliers as well as compensation mechanisms substantially impact productivity cost estimates, the available evidence is scarce. Moreover, the generalizability as well as validity of assumptions underlying the calculations are unclear. Available measurement methods for compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects differ in approaches and are hardly validated.
CONCLUSION
While our review suggests that compensation mechanisms and multiplier effects may have a significant impact on productivity losses and costs, much remains unclear about their features, valid measurement, and correct valuation. This hampers their current inclusion in economic evaluation, and therefore, more research into both phenomena remains warranted.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37592122
doi: 10.1007/s40273-023-01304-4
pii: 10.1007/s40273-023-01304-4
pmc: PMC10450000
doi:
Types de publication
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Pagination
1031-1050Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Health Policy. 2002 Aug;61(2):173-87
pubmed: 12088890
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(1):47-54
pubmed: 15693727
Br Dent J. 2000 Mar 11;188(5):250-4
pubmed: 10758687
Health Econ Policy Law. 2020 Oct;15(4):419-439
pubmed: 31685052
Value Health. 2017 Sep;20(8):1058-1064
pubmed: 28964437
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Dec 18;14:597
pubmed: 25519705
Health Econ. 2008 Apr;17(4):469-85
pubmed: 17628862
Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2005 Feb;5(1):23-8
pubmed: 19807557
Value Health. 2012 Jan;15(1):46-54
pubmed: 22264971
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Dec;75(11):1981-8
pubmed: 22925428
Med Care. 2006 Apr;44(4):352-8
pubmed: 16565636
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Mar;20(2):175-180
pubmed: 30187251
BMJ. 1996 Aug 3;313(7052):275-83
pubmed: 8704542
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000100
pubmed: 19621070
J Eval Clin Pract. 2001 Feb;7(1):47-64
pubmed: 11240839
BMJ. 1998 May 16;316(7143):1529-30
pubmed: 9582152
Eur J Health Econ. 2019 Dec;20(9):1399-1408
pubmed: 31444674
J Health Econ. 1997 Apr;16(2):249-55; discussion 257-9
pubmed: 10173080
Pharmacoecon Open. 2021 Sep;5(3):349-364
pubmed: 33423205
Inquiry. 2015 Aug 25;52:
pubmed: 26310501
MDM Policy Pract. 2022 Aug 3;7(2):23814683221113846
pubmed: 35936828
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Nov;144:127-37
pubmed: 26421997
Value Health. 2015 Sep;18(6):753-8
pubmed: 26409601
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 1998 Sep;12(9):919-23
pubmed: 9768536
Value Health. 2021 Nov;24(11):1686-1699
pubmed: 34711370
Laryngoscope. 2013 Jun;123(6):1341-7
pubmed: 23483522
Pharmacoeconomics. 2023 Sep;41(9):1103-1115
pubmed: 36856941
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(2):105-11
pubmed: 15748085
Eur J Health Econ. 2016 Jan;17(1):31-44
pubmed: 25387561
Pharmacoeconomics. 2013 Jul;31(7):537-49
pubmed: 23620213
Value Health. 2023 May;26(5):712-720
pubmed: 35973924
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(5):449-59
pubmed: 15896097
Value Health. 2013 Jul-Aug;16(5):740-4
pubmed: 23947966
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2010;2:105-12
pubmed: 21935319
Health Econ. 2002 Apr;11(3):221-31
pubmed: 11921319
Health Econ. 2006 Feb;15(2):111-23
pubmed: 16200550
J Health Econ. 2008 Mar;27(2):325-38
pubmed: 18179835
BMJ. 1993 Sep 11;307(6905):670-3
pubmed: 8401057
Health Econ. 2005 May;14(5):435-43
pubmed: 15497201
J Health Econ. 2013 Mar;32(2):386-91
pubmed: 23348051
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Jul;29(7):601-19
pubmed: 21545189
Soc Sci Med. 2015 Dec;147:62-71
pubmed: 26547046
Health Econ Policy Law. 2014 Apr;9(2):215-29
pubmed: 24451170
Pharmacoeconomics. 2022 Jan;40(1):7-11
pubmed: 34913141
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2013 Nov 18;5:565-73
pubmed: 24273412
Pharmacoeconomics. 2014 Apr;32(4):335-44
pubmed: 24504850
Pharmacoeconomics. 2005;23(2):103-4
pubmed: 15748084
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Jan;72(2):185-92
pubmed: 21146909
Scand J Work Environ Health. 2018 Sep 1;44(5):458-474
pubmed: 29405241