Are intersectoral costs considered in economic evaluations of interventions relating to sexually transmitted infections (STIs)? A systematic review

Lena Schnitzler, Silvia M. A. A. Evers, Louise Jackson, Aggie T. G. Paulus, Tracy Roberts

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

28 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background/objective

Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) not only have an impact on the health sector but also the private resources of those affected, their families and other sectors of society (i.e. labour, education). This study aimed to i) review and identify economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs, which aimed to include a societal perspective; ii) analyse the intersectoral costs (i.e. costs broader than healthcare) included; iii) categorise these costs by sector; and iv) assess the impact of intersectoral costs on the overall study results.
Methods

Seven databases were searched: MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE (Ovid), Web of Science, CINAHL, PsycINFO, EconLit and NHS EED. Key search terms included terms for economic evaluation, STIs and specific infections. This review considered trial- and model-based economic evaluations conducted in an OECD member country. Studies were included that assessed intersectoral costs. Intersectoral costs were extracted and categorised by sector using Drummond’s cost classification scheme (i.e. patient/family, productivity, costs in other sectors). A narrative synthesis was performed.
Results

Twenty-nine studies qualified for data extraction and narrative synthesis. Twenty-eight studies applied a societal perspective of which 8 additionally adopted a healthcare or payer perspective, or both. One study used a modified payer perspective. The following sectors were identified: patient/family, informal care, paid labour (productivity), non-paid opportunity costs, education, and consumption. Patient/family costs were captured in 11 studies and included patient time, travel expenses, out-of-pocket costs and premature burial costs. Informal caregiver support (non-family) and unpaid help by family/friends was captured in three studies. Paid labour losses were assessed in all but three studies. Three studies also captured the costs and inability to perform non-paid work. Educational costs and future non-health consumption costs were each captured in one study. The inclusion of intersectoral costs resulted in more favourable cost estimates.
Conclusions

This systematic review suggests that economic evaluations of interventions relating to STIs that adopt a societal perspective tend to be limited in scope. There is an urgent need for economic evaluations to be more comprehensive in order to allow policy/decision-makers to make better-informed decisions.
Original languageEnglish
Article number2180
Number of pages18
JournalBMC Public Health
Volume22
Early online date25 Nov 2022
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 25 Nov 2022

Bibliographical note

Not yet published as of 21/11/2022.

Keywords

  • Intersectoral
  • Multisectoral
  • Societal
  • Costs
  • Health economics
  • HTA
  • Economic valuation
  • Sexually transmitted diseases
  • STIs
  • HIV

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Are intersectoral costs considered in economic evaluations of interventions relating to sexually transmitted infections (STIs)? A systematic review'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this