产前和新生儿筛查计划在卫生经济评估中的效益和危害:VALENTIA 系统回顾和定性调查。

IF 3.5 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Oliver Rivero-Arias, May Ee Png, Ashley White, Miaoqing Yang, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Lisa Hinton, Felicity Boardman, Abigail McNiven, Jane Fisher, Baskaran Thilaganathan, Sam Oddie, Anne-Marie Slowther, Svetlana Ratushnyak, Nia Roberts, Jenny Shilton Osborne, Stavros Petrou
{"title":"产前和新生儿筛查计划在卫生经济评估中的效益和危害:VALENTIA 系统回顾和定性调查。","authors":"Oliver Rivero-Arias, May Ee Png, Ashley White, Miaoqing Yang, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Lisa Hinton, Felicity Boardman, Abigail McNiven, Jane Fisher, Baskaran Thilaganathan, Sam Oddie, Anne-Marie Slowther, Svetlana Ratushnyak, Nia Roberts, Jenny Shilton Osborne, Stavros Petrou","doi":"10.3310/PYTK6591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work.</p><p><strong>Systematic review methods: </strong>We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework.</p><p><strong>Qualitative methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"28 25","pages":"1-180"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11228689/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation.\",\"authors\":\"Oliver Rivero-Arias, May Ee Png, Ashley White, Miaoqing Yang, Sian Taylor-Phillips, Lisa Hinton, Felicity Boardman, Abigail McNiven, Jane Fisher, Baskaran Thilaganathan, Sam Oddie, Anne-Marie Slowther, Svetlana Ratushnyak, Nia Roberts, Jenny Shilton Osborne, Stavros Petrou\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/PYTK6591\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>(1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work.</p><p><strong>Systematic review methods: </strong>We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework.</p><p><strong>Qualitative methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\"28 25\",\"pages\":\"1-180\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11228689/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/PYTK6591\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/PYTK6591","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:卫生经济评估用于确定产前或新生儿筛查项目在多重效益和危害的驱动下产生净效益所需的资源是否合理。目标:(1)确定该领域卫生经济评估所采用的效益和危害,并评估如何衡量和评价这些效益和危害;(2)确定未来经济评估应考虑的属性或与利益相关者的相关性;以及(3)就这些研究应考虑的效益和危害提出建议:设计:系统回顾与定性工作相结合的混合方法:我们使用所有主要的电子数据库检索了 2000 年 1 月至 2021 年 1 月期间发表的文献和灰色文献。在一个或多个经济合作与发展组织国家开展的产前或新生儿筛查项目的经济评估被认为符合条件。报告质量采用《卫生经济评价报告标准综合核对表》进行评估。我们通过综合描述性分析确定了效益和危害,并构建了一个主题框架:我们对有关新生儿筛查经验的现有文献进行了荟萃分析,对有关产前或新生儿筛查或筛查对象生活状况的现有个人访谈进行了二次分析,并对从利益相关者处收集的有关其筛查经验的原始数据进行了专题分析:文献检索发现了 52244 篇文章和报告,其中包括 336 项独特的研究。主题框架产生了七个主题:(1) 筛选条件诊断,(2) 寿命和健康状况调整,(3) 治疗,(4) 长期成本,(5) 过度诊断,(6) 妊娠损失和 (7) 对家庭成员的溢出效应。产前筛查的益处和弊端评估中,大部分都涉及筛查疾病的诊断(115 例,占 47.5%)、寿命年数和健康状况调整(90 例,占 37.2%)以及治疗(88 例,占 36.4%)。在评估新生儿筛查的研究中,同样的主题也占了大部分的益处和危害。长期成本、过度诊断和溢出效应往往被忽视。筛查对家庭的广泛影响被认为对利益相关者很重要。我们观察到主题框架与定性证据之间存在良好的重叠:由于纳入的研究较多,在系统性文献综述中进行双重数据提取并不可行。在利益相关者访谈中很难招募到医护人员:在该领域的卫生经济评估中,效益和危害的选择并不一致,这表明需要更多的方法指导。我们提出的主题框架可用于指导未来产前和新生儿筛查项目健康经济评估的发展:本研究注册为 PROSPERO CRD42020165236:该奖项由英国国家健康与护理研究所(NIHR)健康技术评估项目资助(NIHR奖项编号:NIHR127489),全文发表于《健康技术评估》(Health Technology Assessment)第28卷第25期。更多奖项信息请参阅 NIHR Funding and Awards 网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Benefits and harms of antenatal and newborn screening programmes in health economic assessments: the VALENTIA systematic review and qualitative investigation.

Background: Health economic assessments are used to determine whether the resources needed to generate net benefit from an antenatal or newborn screening programme, driven by multiple benefits and harms, are justifiable. It is not known what benefits and harms have been adopted by economic evaluations assessing these programmes and whether they omit benefits and harms considered important to relevant stakeholders.

Objectives: (1) To identify the benefits and harms adopted by health economic assessments in this area, and to assess how they have been measured and valued; (2) to identify attributes or relevance to stakeholders that ought to be considered in future economic assessments; and (3) to make recommendations about the benefits and harms that should be considered by these studies.

Design: Mixed methods combining systematic review and qualitative work.

Systematic review methods: We searched the published and grey literature from January 2000 to January 2021 using all major electronic databases. Economic evaluations of an antenatal or newborn screening programme in one or more Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries were considered eligible. Reporting quality was assessed using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. We identified benefits and harms using an integrative descriptive analysis and constructed a thematic framework.

Qualitative methods: We conducted a meta-ethnography of the existing literature on newborn screening experiences, a secondary analysis of existing individual interviews related to antenatal or newborn screening or living with screened-for conditions, and a thematic analysis of primary data collected with stakeholders about their experiences with screening.

Results: The literature searches identified 52,244 articles and reports, and 336 unique studies were included. Thematic framework resulted in seven themes: (1) diagnosis of screened for condition, (2) life-years and health status adjustments, (3) treatment, (4) long-term costs, (5) overdiagnosis, (6) pregnancy loss and (7) spillover effects on family members. Diagnosis of screened-for condition (115, 47.5%), life-years and health status adjustments (90, 37.2%) and treatment (88, 36.4%) accounted for most of the benefits and harms evaluating antenatal screening. The same themes accounted for most of the benefits and harms included in studies assessing newborn screening. Long-term costs, overdiagnosis and spillover effects tended to be ignored. The wide-reaching family implications of screening were considered important to stakeholders. We observed good overlap between the thematic framework and the qualitative evidence.

Limitations: Dual data extraction within the systematic literature review was not feasible due to the large number of studies included. It was difficult to recruit healthcare professionals in the stakeholder's interviews.

Conclusions: There is no consistency in the selection of benefits and harms used in health economic assessments in this area, suggesting that additional methods guidance is needed. Our proposed thematic framework can be used to guide the development of future health economic assessments evaluating antenatal and newborn screening programmes.

Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42020165236.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR127489) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 28, No. 25. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信