IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v31y2013i4p257-267.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation (Second and Updated Version)

Author

Listed:
  • SeungJin Bae
  • SooOk Lee
  • Eun Bae
  • Sunmee Jang

Abstract

The first version of the Korean guidelines for pharmacoeconomic evaluation was published by Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service (HIRA) in 2006. Since the introduction of the first version, domestic experience with the application of the recommendations has accumulated, and methodologies in certain areas have progressed considerably. Based on these experiences, HIRA initiated a guidelines revision project to address the need for revisions. The purpose of this study is to share the process used to complete these guideline revisions and to provide the contents of the revised guidelines. In developing the current revision, meetings with the advisory committee and working-level meetings with pharmaceutical companies were held several times to reach as much of a consensus as possible, and the results of a survey of pharmaceutical companies and decision makers regarding the existing guidelines were considered. The second version of the guidelines clarified the level of data requirement (‘must’, ‘recommended’, ‘preferred’) based on the data availability, the information needs of the decision makers and the strength of the evidence. The recommended perspective economic studies should take has been modified and additional guidance has been provided on QALY measurement. Manuals for systematic reviews and indirect comparisons have been published, and a standardized reporting format for expert opinions has been added. Sections on preferred methods for evaluations, sensitivity analysis, modelling and time horizon have been elucidated. The revised guidelines clarify the expression of the recommendations, making them more user-friendly, and provide more specific guidance to improve the quality and comparability across submissions. Copyright Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Suggested Citation

  • SeungJin Bae & SooOk Lee & Eun Bae & Sunmee Jang, 2013. "Korean Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation (Second and Updated Version)," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 31(4), pages 257-267, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:31:y:2013:i:4:p:257-267
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-012-0021-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s40273-012-0021-6
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-012-0021-6?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garber, Alan M. & Phelps, Charles E., 2008. "Future costs and the future of cost-effectiveness analysis," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 819-821, July.
    2. Richard Norman & Paula Cronin & Rosalie Viney & Madeleine King & Deborah Street & John Brazier & Julie Ratcliffe, 2007. "Valuing EQ-5D health states: A review and analysis, CHERE Working Paper 2007/9," Working Papers 2007/9, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    3. John Brazier & Jennifer Roberts & Aki Tsuchiya & Jan Busschbach, 2004. "A comparison of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D across seven patient groups," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(9), pages 873-884, September.
    4. Julio López-Bastida & Juan Oliva & Fernando Antoñanzas & Anna García-Altés & Ramón Gisbert & Javier Mar & Jaume Puig-Junoy, 2010. "Spanish recommendations on economic evaluation of health technologies," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 11(5), pages 513-520, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jeewon Park & SeungJin Bae, 2020. "Modeling Healthcare Costs Attributable to Secondhand Smoke Exposure at Home among South Korean Children," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-12, June.
    2. Bae, Green & Bae, Eun Young & Bae, SeungJin, 2015. "Same drugs, valued differently? Comparing comparators and methods used in reimbursement recommendations in Australia, Canada, and Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(5), pages 577-587.
    3. Jiryoun Gong & Juhee Han & Donghwan Lee & Seungjin Bae, 2020. "A Meta-Regression Analysis of Utility Weights for Breast Cancer: The Power of Patients’ Experience," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(24), pages 1-16, December.
    4. Green Bae & SeungJin Bae & Donghwan Lee & Juhee Han & Dong-Hoe Koo & Do Yeun Kim & Hee-Jun Kim & Sung Young Oh & Hee Yeon Lee & Jong Hwan Lee & Hye Sook Han & Hyerim Ha & Jin Hyoung Kang, 2021. "Value Frameworks: Adaptation of Korean Versions of Value Frameworks for Oncology," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-10, March.
    5. Gyeyoung Choi & Yujeong Kim & Gyeongseon Shin & SeungJin Bae, 2022. "Projecting Lifetime Health Outcomes and Costs Associated with the Ambient Fine Particulate Matter Exposure among Adult Women in Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-14, February.
    6. Matthew Kennedy-Martin & Bernhard Slaap & Michael Herdman & Mandy Reenen & Tessa Kennedy-Martin & Wolfgang Greiner & Jan Busschbach & Kristina S. Boye, 2020. "Which multi-attribute utility instruments are recommended for use in cost-utility analysis? A review of national health technology assessment (HTA) guidelines," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(8), pages 1245-1257, November.
    7. Bae, Eun-Young & Hong, Ji-Min & Kwon, Hye-Young & Jang, Suhyun & Lee, Hye-Jae & Bae, SeungJin & Yang, Bong-Min, 2016. "Eight-year experience of using HTA in drug reimbursement: South Korea," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(6), pages 612-620.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brazier, JE & Yang, Y & Tsuchiya, A, 2008. "A review of studies mapping (or cross walking) from non-preference based measures of health to generic preference-based measures," MPRA Paper 29808, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Hirsch Ruchlin & Ralph Insinga, 2008. "A Review of Health-Utility Data for Osteoarthritis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(11), pages 925-935, November.
    3. Marco DiBonaventura & Lance Richard & Maya Kumar & Anna Forsythe & Natalia M Flores & Margaret Moline, 2015. "The Association between Insomnia and Insomnia Treatment Side Effects on Health Status, Work Productivity, and Healthcare Resource Use," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-14, October.
    4. Efthymiadou, Olina & Mossman, Jean & Kanavos, Panos, 2019. "Health related quality of life aspects not captured by EQ-5D-5L: Results from an international survey of patients," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 159-165.
    5. C. Rubio-Terrés & J. Soria & P. Morange & J. Souto & P. Suchon & J. Mateo & N. Saut & D. Rubio-Rodríguez & J. Sala & A. Gracia & S. Pich & E. Salas, 2015. "Economic Analysis of Thrombo inCode, a Clinical–Genetic Function for Assessing the Risk of Venous Thromboembolism," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 233-242, April.
    6. M. Barbieri & H. Weatherly & R. Ara & H. Basarir & M. Sculpher & R. Adams & H. Ahmed & C. Coles & T. Guerrero-Urbano & C. Nutting & M. Powell, 2014. "What is the Quality of Economic Evaluations of Non-Drug Therapies? A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of Economic Evaluations of Radiotherapy for Cancer," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 497-510, October.
    7. Rivero-Santana, Amado & Cuéllar-Pompa, Leticia & Sánchez-Gómez, Luis M. & Perestelo-Pérez, Lilisbeth & Serrano-Aguilar, Pedro, 2014. "Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of different immunization strategies against whooping cough to reduce child morbidity and mortality," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 82-91.
    8. D. Stratmann‐Schoene & T. Kuehn & R. Kreienberg & R. Leidl, 2006. "A preference‐based index for the SF‐12," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(6), pages 553-564, June.
    9. Stavros Petrou & Christine Hockley, 2005. "An investigation into the empirical validity of the EQ‐5D and SF‐6D based on hypothetical preferences in a general population," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(11), pages 1169-1189, November.
    10. B. Rodríguez-Sánchez & S. Daugbjerg & L. M. Peña-Longobardo & J. Oliva-Moreno & I. Aranda-Reneo & A. Cicchetti & J. López-Bastida, 2023. "Does the inclusion of societal costs change the economic evaluations recommendations? A systematic review for multiple sclerosis disease," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(2), pages 247-277, March.
    11. Nalin Payakachat & Mir Ali & J. Tilford, 2015. "Can The EQ-5D Detect Meaningful Change? A Systematic Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(11), pages 1137-1154, November.
    12. Garry Barton & Tracey Sach & Michael Doherty & Anthony Avery & Claire Jenkinson & Kenneth Muir, 2008. "An assessment of the discriminative ability of the EQ-5D index , SF-6D, and EQ VAS, using sociodemographic factors and clinical conditions," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 9(3), pages 237-249, August.
    13. Jeremy D. Goldhaber-Fiebert & Margaret L. Brandeau, 2015. "Evaluating Cost-effectiveness of Interventions That Affect Fertility and Childbearing," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 35(7), pages 818-846, October.
    14. Bruno Casal & Eva Rodríguez-Míguez & Berta Rivera, 2020. "Measuring intangible cost-of-morbidity due to substance dependence: implications of using alternative preference-based instruments," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 21(7), pages 1039-1048, September.
    15. Ralph Schmidt & Istvan Majer & Natalia García Román & Alejandra Rivas Basterra & ElizaBeth Grubb & Constancio Medrano López, 2017. "Palivizumab in the prevention of severe respiratory syncytial virus infection in children with congenital heart disease; a novel cost-utility modeling study reflecting evidence-based clinical pathways," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-14, December.
    16. Marie Kruse & Jan Sørensen & Dorte Gyrd-Hansen, 2012. "Future costs in cost-effectiveness analysis: an empirical assessment," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 13(1), pages 63-70, February.
    17. Roberta Ara & John Brazier & Ismail Azzabi Zouraq, 2017. "The Use of Health State Utility Values in Decision Models," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 77-88, December.
    18. Klazien Matter-Walstra & Dirk Klingbiel & Thomas Szucs & Bernhard Pestalozzi & Matthias Schwenkglenks, 2014. "Using the EuroQol EQ-5D in Swiss Cancer Patients, Which Value Set Should be Applied?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(6), pages 591-599, June.
    19. Ali Tafazzoli & Odette S. Reifsnider & Leana Bellanca & Jack Ishak & Marc Carrasco & Pal Rakonczai & Matthew Stargardter & Stephan Linden, 2023. "A European multinational cost-effectiveness analysis of empagliflozin in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(9), pages 1441-1454, December.
    20. Julie A. Campbell & Andrew J. Palmer & Alison Venn & Melanie Sharman & Petr Otahal & Amanda Neil, 2016. "A Head-to-Head Comparison of the EQ-5D-5L and AQoL-8D Multi-Attribute Utility Instruments in Patients Who Have Previously Undergone Bariatric Surgery," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 9(4), pages 311-322, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:31:y:2013:i:4:p:257-267. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.