Premium
Understanding economic evidence for the prevention and treatment of atopic eczema
Author(s) -
Sach T.H.,
McManus E.,
Levell N.J.
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
british journal of dermatology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.304
H-Index - 179
eISSN - 1365-2133
pISSN - 0007-0963
DOI - 10.1111/bjd.17696
Subject(s) - medicine , psychological intervention , atopic dermatitis , economic evaluation , pimecrolimus , evidence based medicine , cost effectiveness , quality of life (healthcare) , evidence based practice , scientific evidence , empirical evidence , economic impact analysis , economic cost , medline , family medicine , alternative medicine , tacrolimus , dermatology , surgery , nursing , pathology , risk analysis (engineering) , civil engineering , neoclassical economics , political science , philosophy , epistemology , law , transplantation , engineering , economics
Summary Background Atopic eczema is an inflammatory skin condition, with a similar impact on health‐related quality of life as other chronic diseases. Increasing pressures on resources within the National Health Service increase the importance of having good economic evidence to inform their allocation. Objectives To educate dermatologists about economic methods with reference to currently available economic evidence on eczema. Methods The role of different types of economic evidence is illustrated by evidence found in a systematic literature search conducted across 12 online databases up to 22 May 2017. Primary empirical studies either reporting the results of a cost‐of‐illness study or evaluating the cost, utility or full economic evaluation of interventions for preventing or treating eczema were included. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed data abstraction, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Evidence tables of results were produced for narrative discussion. The reporting quality of economic evaluations was assessed. Results Seventy‐eight studies (described in 80 papers) were deemed eligible. Thirty‐three (42%) were judged to be economic evaluations, 12 (15%) cost analyses, six (8%) utility analyses, 26 (33%) cost‐of‐illness studies and one a feasibility study (1%). The calcineurin inhibitors tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, as well as barrier creams, had the most economic evidence available. Partially hydrolysed infant formula was the most commonly evaluated prevention. Conclusions The current level of economic evidence for interventions aimed at preventing and treating eczema is limited compared with that available for clinical outcomes, suggesting that greater collaboration between clinicians and economists might be beneficial.