title: Review of Economic Submissions to NICE Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme.
abstract: The economic evaluation of medical devices is increasingly used to inform decision making on adopting new or novel technologies; however, challenges are inevitable due to the unique characteristics of devices. Cost-consequence analyses are recommended and employed by the English National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP) to help address these challenges. The aim of this work was to review the critiques raised for previous MTEP submissions and explore if there were common problems across submissions. We reviewed a sample of 12 economic submissions to MTEP representing 50 % of 24 sets of guidance issued to July 2015. For each submission, we reviewed the External Assessment Centre's (EAC) report and the guidance document produced by NICE. We identified the main problems raised by the EAC's assessments and the committee's considerations for each submission, and explored strategies for improvement. We found that the identification and measurement of costs and consequences are the main shortcomings within economic submissions to MTEP. Together, these shortcomings accounted for 42 % of criticisms by the EACs among the reviewed submissions. In certain circumstances problems with these shortcomings may be unavoidable, for example, if there is a limited evidence base for the device being appraised. Nevertheless, strategies can often be adopted to improve submissions, including the use of more appropriate time horizons, whilst cost and resource use information should be taken, where possible, from nationally representative sources.
authors.affiliation: Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK. a.o.alshreef@sheffield.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Abualbishr
authors.identifier: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2737-1365
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Alshreef
authors.affiliation: York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, Enterprise House, Innovation Way, York, YO10 5NQ, UK.
authors.forename: Michelle
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Jenks
authors.affiliation: York Health Economics Consortium, University of York, Enterprise House, Innovation Way, York, YO10 5NQ, UK.
authors.forename: William
authors.initials: W
authors.lastname: Green
authors.affiliation: Health Economics and Decision Science, School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield, S1 4DA, UK.
authors.forename: Simon
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Dixon
mesh_terms: D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D004739:England; D004864:Equipment and Supplies / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards; D006801:Humans; D012196:Review Literature as Topic; D013222:State Medicine / Q000191:economics* / Q000592:standards; D013673:Technology Assessment, Biomedical / Q000191:economics* / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards