Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review
- PMID: 33015754
- DOI: 10.1007/s40273-020-00963-x
Health Economic Evaluation Alongside Stepped Wedge Trials: A Methodological Systematic Review
Abstract
Background: Recently, there has been an increase in use of the stepped wedge trial (SWT) design in the context of health services research, due to its pragmatic and methodological advantages over the parallel group design.
Objective: Our objective was to summarise the statistical methods used when conducting economic evaluations alongside SWTs.
Methods: A systematic literature search extending to February 2020 was conducted in the PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS-EED) databases to find and evaluate studies where there was an intention to conduct an economic evaluation alongside an SWT. Studies were assessed for their eligibility, findings, reporting of statistical methods and quality of reporting.
Results: Of the 586 studies retrieved from the literature search, 69 studies were identified and included in this systematic review. A total of 54 studies were published protocols, with eight economic evaluations and seven studies reporting full trial results. Included studies varied in terms of their reporting of statistical methods, in both detail and methodology. There were 34 studies that did not report any statistical methods for the economic evaluation, and only 16 studies reported appropriate methods, mainly using some form of mixed/multilevel model, and two used seemingly unrelated regression. Twelve studies reported the use of generic bootstrap methods and other modelling techniques, whilst the remaining studies failed to appropriately account for clustering, correlation or adjustment for time.
Conclusions: The use of appropriate statistical methods that account for time, clustering and correlation between costs and outcomes is an important part of SWT health economics analysis, one that will benefit from an effort to communicate the methods available and their performance.
References
-
- Hemming K, Taljaard M, McKenzie JE, Hooper R, Copas A, Thompson JA, et al. Reporting of stepped wedge cluster randomised trials: extension of the CONSORT 2010 statement with explanation and elaboration. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2018;363:k1614. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.k1614 . - DOI
-
- Hussey MA, Hughes JP. Design and analysis of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials. Contemp Clin Trials. 2007;28(2):182–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cct.2006.05.007 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Mdege ND, Man MS, Taylor Nee Brown CA, Torgerson DJ. Systematic review of stepped wedge cluster randomized trials shows that design is particularly used to evaluate interventions during routine implementation. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(9):936–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.12.003 . - DOI
-
- Hemming K, Haines TP, Chilton PJ, Girling AJ, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge cluster randomised trial: rationale, design, analysis, and reporting. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2015;350:h391. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.h391 . - DOI
-
- Brown CA, Lilford RJ. The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6:54. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-54 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
Publication types
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
