Note! Please note that this article is currently in the "Article in Press" stage and is not the final "Version of record". While it has been accepted, copy-edited, and formatted, however, it is still undergoing proofreading and corrections by the authors. Therefore, the text may still change before the final publication. Although "Articles in Press" may not have all bibliographic details available, the DOI and the year of online publication can still be used to cite them. The article title, DOI, publication year, and author(s) should all be included in the citation format. Once the final "Version of record" becomes available the "Article in Press" will be replaced by that.
Abstract
Background: Cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) continue to be the primary cause of mortality globally and invariably in India as well. The rapid upsurge in the prevalence of CVDs in India has created a pressing need to promote contemporary, sustainable, and cost-effective interventions to tackle the CVD burden. This systematic review integrates the research-based evidence of the cost-effectiveness of various interventions that can be adapted to control CVDs in India.
Methods: Databases, namely, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, and Google Scholar, were searched for data on the economic evaluation of interventions targeting CVD based on the Indian population for a period of 30 years (1991-2021). Two reviewers assessed the articles for eligibility, and data were extracted from the shortlisted articles as per a predefined template, including the quantification of methodological aspects. Results: In total, 1249 studies were examined, out of which 23 completely met the inclusion criteria for full-text review. A total of 16 studies were based solely on the Indian population, while the rest (7) included South Asia/Asia for the intervention, of which India was a participant nation. Most of the economic evaluations targeted treatment-based or pharmacological interventions (14) for CVDs. The evaluations were based on Decision-based models (10), Randomized controlled Trials (RCTs) (9), and Observational studies (4). The cost-effectiveness ratio for the included studies exhibited a diverse range due to variations in methodological approaches, such as differences in study settings, populations, and inconsistencies in study design. The mean ICER (Incremental Cost-effectiveness ratio) for primordial and primary preventions was found to be 3073.8 (US $2022) and 17489.9 (US $2022), respectively. Moreover, the combined mean value for secondary and tertiary prevention was 2029.6 (US$2022). Conclusion: The economic evidence of public health interventions are expanding, but their focus is restricted towards pharmacological interventions. There is an urgency to emphasize primordial and primary prevention for better outcomes in health economics decision-making. Technology- based avenues for intervention need more exploration in order to cater to a large population like India.
