IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/pharme/v43y2025i3d10.1007_s40273-024-01455-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Evaluations of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Treating Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction: A Scoping Review

Author

Listed:
  • Anton Pak

    (The University of Queensland)

  • Madeline O’Grady

    (The University of Queensland)

  • Gerald Holtmann

    (The University of Queensland
    Princess Alexandra Hospital)

  • Ayesha Shah

    (The University of Queensland
    Princess Alexandra Hospital)

  • Haitham Tuffaha

    (The University of Queensland)

Abstract

Background and Objectives Disorders of gut-brain interaction are highly prevalent and burdensome conditions for both patients and healthcare systems. Given the limited effectiveness of pharmacotherapy in treating disorders of gut-brain interaction, non-pharmacological interventions are increasingly used; however, the value for money of non-pharmacological treatments is uncertain. This is the first review to assess the economic evaluation evidence of non-pharmacological interventions for disorders of gut-brain interaction. Methods A scoping review was conducted in line with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines. Reporting adhered to ISPOR’s good practices for systematic reviews with cost and cost-effectiveness outcomes. Comprehensive searches were performed on 24 October, 2023, and an updated search was run on 18 May, 2024 in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and the International HTA database, with two reviewers screening studies in parallel. The novel Criteria for Health Economic Quality Evaluation (CHEQUE) framework was used to assess methodological and reporting quality. Reporting quality was further assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) 2022. Results Fifteen studies were included. Most studies examined treatments for irritable bowel syndrome. Cognitive behavioural therapy, dietary interventions and sacral neuromodulation were cost effective. Acupuncture and physiotherapy were not. CHEQUE assessment showed 12 studies met at least 70% of the methodological criteria, and 14 studies achieved 70% or more for reporting quality. Conclusions This review highlights gaps in the current evidence base, particularly in the robustness and generalisability of results due to methodological inconsistencies. Future research should incorporate longer follow-ups, comprehensive cost assessments, subgroup analyses, equity considerations and clearer justifications for modelling assumptions.

Suggested Citation

  • Anton Pak & Madeline O’Grady & Gerald Holtmann & Ayesha Shah & Haitham Tuffaha, 2025. "Economic Evaluations of Non-Pharmacological Interventions for Treating Disorders of Gut-Brain Interaction: A Scoping Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 43(3), pages 249-269, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:pharme:v:43:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-024-01455-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s40273-024-01455-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40273-024-01455-y
    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/s40273-024-01455-y?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:43:y:2025:i:3:d:10.1007_s40273-024-01455-y. 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.