OP144 Health Economics In Clinical Practice Guidelines: The Know-Do Gap

Abstract

Introduction:

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are an ideal implementation mechanism for promoting effective clinical practice, but without due consideration of costs they may do more harm than good and become a source of inefficiency. The Alberta Guideline Adaptation Program sought current best practice for incorporating economic information into CPGs to better leverage health technology assessment (HTA) and health economic expertise in its guideline development program.

Methods:

A comprehensive, systematic review of published and grey literature was undertaken to: (i) catalogue theoretical frameworks and practical methods for incorporating economic information into CPGs and forecasting the post-implementation economic impact of CPGs; (ii) summarize current methods for evaluating the economic impact of CPGs; and, (iii) identify barriers and facilitators to incorporating economic information into CPGs.

Results:

Rigorous economic analyses were infrequently incorporated in CPG development. While a selection of guidance documents and CPG manuals published between 2001 and 2017 by leading CPG developers emphasized the health economist's role and the importance of incorporating economic evidence into CPGs, few provided adequate guidance on the best way to do this. There is no agreement on how best to monitor the economic impact of CPGs. Analysis of a sample of over 100 studies published between 2005 and 2013 identified the three main methods currently used to assess the post-implementation economic impact of CPGs: pre-test/post-test cost analyses, mapping studies, and modelled cost-effectiveness studies. The key elements of each study type were summarized and compared.

Conclusions:

The review highlighted the under-recognized know-do gap among developers with respect to using health economics information and expertise in CPG development. It identified the advantages and potential limitations of applying health economics to CPG development, as well as areas where developers can better utilize HTA researchers and health economists to improve the quality of guidelines and better document the resource implications and feasibility of the interventions they recommend.