Cost‐effectiveness analyses (CEAs) of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment strategies have become common, but few appear to include patient engagement or the patient perspective. The objectives of the current study were to (1) identify published HCV CEA studies that include patient input and (2) derive insights on patient‐informed variable and outcome selection to build a framework for future economic analyses of HCV. A literature search was conducted using SCOPUS, EMBASE, and PubMed from January 1, 2012 to May 28, 2017. Terms sought included a combination of “incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio” OR “economic evaluation” OR “cost effectiveness analysis” OR “cost utility analysis” OR “budget impact analysis” OR “cost benefit analysis” AND “hepatitis C”. A total of 1,040 articles were identified in the search and seven articles were selected for further evaluation after abstracts and the full text of eligible articles were screened. One economic evaluation used direct patient engagement to account for patient preferences in the final model. The study endpoints identified included a variety of clinical, social, psychological, and economic outcomes. Costs primarily focused on productivity loss, missed work, out‐of‐pocket treatment costs, and indirect costs to family or friends supporting the patient. Conclusion: To date, the inclusion of the patient voice through patient engagement as part of methods in cost‐effectiveness research in existing published studies has been limited. Future CEA studies should consider how patient engagement may impact economic models and their implementation into practice. (Hepatology 2018;67:774‐781).

中文翻译：

---

让丙型肝炎感染患者参与成本效益分析：文献综述

丙型肝炎病毒 (HCV) 治疗策略的成本效益分析 (CEA) 已变得普遍，但似乎很少包括患者参与或患者观点。当前研究的目标是 (1) 确定已发表的 HCV CEA 研究，其中包括患者的意见和 (2) 深入了解患者知情变量和结果选择，为未来的 HCV 经济分析构建框架。2012 年 1 月 1 日至 2017 年 5 月 28 日期间，使用 SCOPUS、EMBASE 和 PubMed 进行了文献检索。搜索的术语包括“增量成本效益比”或“经济评估”或“成本效益分析”或“成本”的组合。效用分析”或“预算影响分析”或“成本效益分析”和“丙型肝炎”。共 1, 检索到 040 篇文章，在摘要和筛选符合条件的文章全文后，选择了 7 篇文章进行进一步评估。一项经济评估使用直接患者参与来解释最终模型中的患者偏好。确定的研究终点包括各种临床、社会、心理和经济结果。成本主要集中在生产力损失、错过工作、自费治​​疗成本以及支持患者的家人或朋友的间接成本。结论：迄今为止，在现有已发表的研究中，通过患者参与将患者的声音纳入成本效益研究方法的一部分是有限的。未来的 CEA 研究应考虑患者参与如何影响经济模型及其在实践中的实施。