Early health technology assessment using the MAFEIP tool. A case study on a wearable device for fall prediction in elderly patients
Tóm tắt
By using a case-study on a fall-prediction device for elderly patients with orthostatic hypotension we aim to demonstrate how the MAFEIP tool, developed as part of the European Innovation Programme on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA), can be used to inform manufacturers on their product development based on a cost-effectiveness criterion. Secondly, we critically appraise the tool and suggest further improvements that may be needed for a larger-scale adoption of MAFEIP within and beside the EIP on AHA initiative. The model was implemented using the MAFEIP tool. Within the tool one way sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the model against the relative effectiveness of the fall-prevention device at different price levels. The MAFEIP tool was applied to a novel fall-prediction device and used to estimate the expected cost-effectiveness and perform threshold analysis. In our case study, the device produced estimated gains of 0.035 QALYs per patient and incremental costs of £ 518 (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio £14,719). Based on the one-way sensitivity analysis, the maximum achievable price at a willingness to pay threshold of £20,000 per QALY is estimated close to £900. The MAFEIP allows to quickly create early economic models, and to explore model uncertainty by performing deterministic sensitivity analysis for single parameters. However, the integration within the MAFEIP of common analytical tools such as probabilistic sensitivity analysis and Value of information would greatly contribute to its relevance for evaluating innovative technologies within and beside the EIP on AHA initiative.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Sorenson C, Kanavos P. Medical technology procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy. Health Policy. 2011;100(1):43–50.
Thokala P, Ochalek J, Leech AA, Tong T. Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds: the Past, the Present and the Future. Pharmacoeconomics. 2018;36(5):509–22.
Hartz S, John J. Contribution of economic evaluation to decision making in early phases of product development: A methodological and empirical review. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(04):465–72.
Ijzerman MJ, Koffijberg H, Fenwick E, Krahn M. Emerging Use of Early Health Technology Assessment in Medical Product Development: A Scoping Review of the Literature. Pharmacoeconomics. 2017;35(7):727–40.
Sonnenberg FA, Beck JR. Markov Models in Medical Decision Making. Med Decis Making. 1993;13(4):322–38.
Castaldo R, Federici C, Pecchia L. Early Stage Healthcare technology assessment. In: Clinical Engineering Book. Second. Elsevier; 2020. p. 799–805.
MAFEIP - Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing [Internet]. [cited 2019 Apr 3]. Available from: https://www.mafeip.eu/.
Support to a Digital Health and Care Innovation initiative in the context of Digital Single Market strategy [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 19]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/sc1-hcc-05-2018.html.
Large scale implementation of digital innovation for health and care in an ageing society [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 19]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/sc1-dth-05-2019.html.
Digital health and care services [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 19]. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/sc1-dth-10-2019-2020.html.
Smart and healthy living at home [Internet]. [cited 2018 Nov 19]. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal/desktop/en/opportunities/h2020/topics/dt-tds-01-2019.html.
Lupiáñez-Villanueva F, Pecchia L. Third WHO Global Forum on Medical Devices Health economic via web: the MAFEIP tool Monitoring and Assessment Framework for the EIP on Active and Healthy Ageing.
Frith J. The association of orthostatic hypotension with falls-an end to the debate? Age Ageing. 2017;46(4):540–1.
Jansen S, Bhangu J, de Rooij S, Daams J, Kenny RA, van der Velde N. The Association of Cardiovascular Disorders and Falls: A Systematic Review. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2016;17:193–9.
Angelousi A, Girerd N, Benetos A, Frimat L, Gautier S, Weryha G, et al. Association between orthostatic hypotension and cardiovascular risk, cerebrovascular risk, cognitive decline and falls as well as overall mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hypertens. 2014;32:1562–71.
Hartog LC, Schrijnders D, Landman GWD, Groenier K, Kleefstra N, Bilo HJG, et al. Is orthostatic hypotension related to falling? A meta-analysis of individual patient data of prospective observational studies. Age and Ageing. 2017;46:568–75.
McDonald C, Pearce M, Kerr SR, Newton J. A prospective study of the association between orthostatic hypotension and falls: Definition matters. Age Ageing. 2017;46(3):439–45.
Finucane C, O’Connell MDL, Donoghue O, Richardson K, Savva GM, Kenny RA. Impaired Orthostatic Blood Pressure Recovery Is Associated with Unexplained and Injurious Falls. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2017;65(3):474–82.
Bjerk M, Brovold T, Skelton DA, Bergland A. Associations between health-related quality of life, physical function and fear of falling in older fallers receiving home care. BMC Geriatr. 2018;18(1):253.
Burns ER, Stevens JA, Lee R. The direct costs of fatal and non-fatal falls among older adults — United States. J Safety Res. 2016;58:99–103.
Rajagopalan R, Litvan I, Jung TP. Fall prediction and prevention systems: Recent trends, challenges, and future research directions. Vol. 17, Sensors (Switzerland). Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI); 2017.
Sannino G, Melillo P, Stranges S, De PG, Pecchia L. Blood Pressure Drop Prediction by using HRV Measurements in Orthostatic Hypotension. J Med Syst. 2015;39(11):143.
Sannino G, Melillo P, Stranges S, De Pietro G, Pecchia L. Short term Heart Rate Variability to predict blood pressure drops due to standing: a pilot study. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2015;15(S3):S2.
ONS. GDP deflators at market prices, and money GDP March 2018 (Quarterly National Accounts) - GOV.UK. Office of National Statistics. 2018.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. WISQARS (Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System)|Injury Center|CDC. WISQARS: Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System.
François C, Hauser RA, Aballéa S, Dorey J, Kharitonova E, Hewitt LA. Cost-effectiveness of droxidopa in patients with neurogenic orthostatic hypotension: post-hoc economic analysis of Phase 3 clinical trial data. J Med Econ. 2016;19(5):515–25.
Iglesias CP, Manca A, Torgerson DJ. The health-related quality of life and cost implications of falls in elderly women. Osteoporos Int. 2009;20(6):869–78.
Briggs A. Probabilistic Analysis of Cost-Effectiveness Models: Statistical Representation of Parameter Uncertainty. Value Health. 2005;8(1):1–2.
Minelli C, Baio G. Value of Information: A Tool to Improve Research Prioritization and Reduce Waste. PLoS Med. 2015;12(9):e1001882.
Heath A, Manolopoulou I, Baio G. A Review of Methods for Analysis of the Expected Value of Information. Med Decis Making. 2017;37(7):747–58.
Fenwick E, Steuten L, Knies S, Ghabri S, Basu A, Murray JF, et al. Value of Information Analysis for Research Decisions—An Introduction: Report 1 of the ISPOR Value of Information Analysis Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health. 2020;23(2):139–50.
Ciani O, Federici C, Pecchia L. The evaluation of medical devices: Are we getting closer to solve the puzzle? a review of recent trends. In: IFMBE Proceedings. 2017. p. 916–9.
Cuche M, Beckerman R, Chowdhury CA, Van Weelden MA. Early dialogue with health technology assessment bodies: a European perspective. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30(6):571–8.
Garrison LP, Towse A, Briggs A, De Pouvourville G, Grueger J, Mohr PE, et al. Performance-based risk-sharing arrangements - Good practices for design, implementation, and evaluation: Report of the ISPOR good practices for performance-based risk-sharing arrangements task force. Value Health. 2013;16(5):703–19.
Federici C, Reckers-Droog V, Ciani O, Dams F, Grigore B, Kaló Z, et al. Coverage with evidence development schemes for medical devices in Europe: characteristics and challenges. Eur J Health Econ [Internet]. 2021 Jun 12 [cited 2021 Jun 14]; Available from: https://link.springer.com/https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-021-01334-9.