Basics of health economics for clinical trials in orthopaedic trauma.

Abstract

With the rise in global healthcare spending, medical decision-making is increasingly based on health economics outcomes. This narrative review aims to provide an overview of cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA), including their advantages and limitations, and outline practical aspects for implementing health economics in clinical trials for orthopaedic trauma. Both CEA and CUA offer several advantages. Firstly, they consider the costs as well as benefits of an intervention, providing a more comprehensive picture of its economic impact. Secondly, they provide a clear and straightforward metric for comparing interventions, which can help decision-makers make informed choices. However, there are methodological shortcomings that must be acknowledged, such as the lack of standardized instruments for assessing health utility measures, which can result in a wide range of cost-benefit ratios. In addition, a consensus on the willingness-to-pay threshold still needs to be reached to develop decision rules for cost-effectiveness similar to clinical effectiveness. Methods such as CEA and CUA should be incorporated into clinical trials in orthopaedic trauma research. Practical aspects for this include planning in advance, preferably in cooperation with a health economist. Selecting appropriate outcome measures is crucial, and both the medical effects of interventions and quality of life instruments should be carefully chosen to ensure comparability with previous studies. Additionally, the potential impact on clinical practice and healthcare policies should be considered. Direct as well as indirect costs should be assessed, and quality assurance with well-established checklists should be confirmed.