Fit for the future? Status of health-related quality of life research in South Africa

被引:1
作者
Marsh, Sophia E. [1 ]
Truter, Ilse [1 ]
机构
[1] Nelson Mandela Univ, Dept Pharm, Drug Utilizat Res Unit DURU, Port Elizabeth, South Africa
关键词
South Africa; Quality of life; Cost-utility analysis; Utilities; CHILDREN;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462320000690
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objective To provide insights into the attributes of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) research within the context of economic evaluations for a potential national health technology assessment process in South Africa, and make evidence generation recommendations. Methods A systematic review was conducted in January 2019 using Medline, the Web of Science (WoS) Core Collection and the South African SciELO collection via the WoS Platform, and in the Cochrane Library. No time restrictions were applied. Duplicate records were removed before first- and second-pass screening by two reviewers working independently. Results The review identified 123 publications representing 104 studies since the first-published article appeared in 1996. Only eight studies were randomized controlled trials, most were cross-sectional (n = 54). The EQ-5D, SF-36, and WHOQOL-BREF were the most used HRQoL instruments (n = 35, n = 23, and n = 10, respectively). Instruments were frequently administered in multiple languages, reflecting the cultural groups in which the study was conducted, with the English version of instruments used most often. Studies were predominantly conducted within the public health sector (n = 67), in the Western Cape province (n = 46), in adults (n = 92) and people with HIV (n = 24). Conclusion South African specific HRQoL studies have been conducted in a range of settings and populations using mostly generic HRQoL instruments in multiple languages. These studies may provide generalizable, real-world data due to their observational nature. However, more comparative and longitudinal studies should be conducted as this is preferred for economic evaluations and patient, disease, and treatment characteristics should be reported in full.
引用
收藏
页码:508 / 517
页数:10
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2014, Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2010, 9 NICE DSU
[3]  
[Anonymous], 2015, NICE DSU TECHNICAL S
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2013, Monit. Futur, P3
[5]   PERFORMANCE OF OVID MEDLINE SEARCH FILTERS TO IDENTIFY HEALTH STATE UTILITY STUDIES [J].
Arber, Mick ;
Garcia, Sonia ;
Veale, Thomas ;
Edwards, Mary ;
Shaw, Alison ;
Glanville, Julie M. .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2017, 33 (04) :472-480
[6]   A comparative review of the pharmacoeconomic guidelines in South Africa [J].
Carapinha, Joao L. .
JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2017, 20 (01) :37-44
[7]  
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2018, PROSPERO INT PROSPEC
[8]  
Council for Medical Schemes, 2019, ANN REP 2018 19
[9]  
Dissemination C.for R., 2009, CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care
[10]  
Duarte A, 2017, HEALTH TECHNOL ASSES, V21, P1, DOI 10.3310/hta21640