Quality of health economic evaluations for the ACC/AHA stable ischemic heart disease practice guideline: A systematic review

The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recently published a rigorous framework to guide integration of economic data into clinical guidelines. We assessed the quality of economic evaluations in a major ACC/AHA clinical guidance report. We systematically identified co...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The American heart journal 2018-10, Vol.204, p.17-33
Main Authors: Stevens, Elizabeth R., Farrell, Daniel, Jumkhawala, Saahil A., Ladapo, Joseph A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accuracy
Cardiology
Cardiovascular disease
Cardiovascular diseases
Clinical practice guidelines
Clinical trials
Coronary artery disease
Cost analysis
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Data analysis
Disease control
Domains
Economic analysis
Economics
Heart
Heart diseases
Humans
Identification methods
Integration
Ischemia
Medicare
Myocardial Ischemia - diagnosis
Myocardial Ischemia - economics
Myocardial Ischemia - therapy
Practice Guidelines as Topic - standards
Quality
Quality assessment
Quality-Adjusted Life Years
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - economics
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic - standards
Research Design - standards
Systematic review
Validity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) recently published a rigorous framework to guide integration of economic data into clinical guidelines. We assessed the quality of economic evaluations in a major ACC/AHA clinical guidance report. We systematically identified cost-effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of RCTs cited in the ACC/AHA 2012 Guideline for the Diagnosis and Management of Patients with Stable Ischemic Heart Disease. We extracted: (1) study identifiers; (2) parent RCT information; (3) economic analysis characteristics; and (4) study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies instrument (QHES). Quality scores were categorized as high (≥75 points) or low (
ISSN:0002-8703
1097-6744
DOI:10.1016/j.ahj.2018.06.013