IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v42y2024i11d10.1007_s40273-024-01410-x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rethinking Tuberculosis Morbidity Quantification: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of TB Disability Weights in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses

Author

Listed:
  • Ewan M. Tomeny

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine)

  • Thomas Hampton

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
    University of Liverpool
    Malawi Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme)

  • Phuong Bich Tran

    (University of Oxford)

  • Laura Rosu

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine)

  • Mphatso D. Phiri

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
    Malawi Liverpool Wellcome Trust Clinical Research Programme)

  • Kathryn A. Haigh

    (University of Liverpool
    University of Cape Town)

  • Jasper Nidoi

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
    Makerere University Lung Institute)

  • Tom Wingfield

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
    Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine
    Karolinska Institutet
    Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust)

  • Eve Worrall

    (Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine)

Abstract

Background The disability-adjusted life year (DALY), a key metric for health resource allocation, encompasses morbidity through disability weights. Widely used in tuberculosis cost-effectiveness analysis (CEAs), DALYs play a significant role in informing intervention adopt/reject decisions. This study reviews the values and consistency of disability weights applied in tuberculosis-related CEAs. Methods We conducted a systematic review using the Tufts CEA database, updated to July 2023 with searches in Embase, Scopus and PubMed. Eligible studies needed to have included a cost-per-DALY ratio, and additionally either evaluated a tuberculosis (TB) intervention or included tuberculosis-related weights. We considered all tuberculosis health states: with/without human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) coinfection, TB treatments and treatment side effects. Data were screened and extracted independently by combinations of two authors. Findings A total of 105 studies spanning 2002–2023 across 50 countries (mainly low- and middle-income countries) were extracted. Disability weights were sourced primarily from the Global Burden of Disease (GBD; 100/165; 61%), with 17 non-GBD studies additionally referenced, along with primary derivation. Inconsistencies in the utilisation of weights were evident: of the 100 usages of GBD-sourced weights, only in 47 instances (47%) had the weight value been explicitly specified with an appropriate up-to-date reference cited (constituting 28% of all weight usages, 47/165). Sensitivity analyses on weight values had been conducted in 30% of studies (31/105). Twelve studies did not clearly specify weights or their sources; nine further calculated DALYs without morbidity. The review suggests methodological gaps in current approaches for representing important aspects of TB, including TB–HIV coinfection, treatment, drug-resistance, extrapulmonary TB and psychological impacts. We propose a set of best practice recommendations. Interpretation There is a need for increased rigour in the application, sensitivity testing and reporting of TB disability weights. Furthermore, there appears a desire among researchers to reflect elements of the tuberculosis experience beyond those allowed for by GBD disability weights.

Suggested Citation

  • Ewan M. Tomeny & Thomas Hampton & Phuong Bich Tran & Laura Rosu & Mphatso D. Phiri & Kathryn A. Haigh & Jasper Nidoi & Tom Wingfield & Eve Worrall, 2024. "Rethinking Tuberculosis Morbidity Quantification: A Systematic Review and Critical Appraisal of TB Disability Weights in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 42(11), pages 1209-1236, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:42:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-024-01410-x
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-024-01410-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-024-01410-x
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40273-024-01410-x?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.

    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:42:y:2024:i:11:d:10.1007_s40273-024-01410-x. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.