Petra Menn (Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, Neuherberg, Germany) Rolf Holle (Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, Neuherberg, Germany)
Abstract
Background: Various software packages are commonly used for the implementation and calculation of decision-analytic models for health economic evaluations. However, comparison of these programs with regard to ease of implementing a model is lacking. Objectives: (i) to compare the assets and drawbacks of three commonly used software packages for Markov models with regard to ease of implementation; and (ii) to investigate how a technical model validation can be conducted by comparing the results of the three implementations. Methods: A Markov model on chronic obstructive pulmonary disease was implemented in TreeAge, Microsoft Excel and Arena with the same assumptions on model structure, transition probabilities and costs. A hypothetical smoking cessation programme for patients in stage 1 was evaluated against usual care. The packages were compared with respect to time and effort for implementation, run-time, features for the presentation of results, and flexibility. Agreement between the packages on average costs and life-years gained and on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was considered for technical validation in the form of expected values (between TreeAge and Excel only) and Monte Carlo simulations. Results: Ease of implementation was best in TreeAge, whereas Arena offered the highest flexibility. Deterministic results were in agreement between TreeAge and Excel, as were simulated values between all three packages. Conclusions: Excel offers an intuitive spreadsheet interface, but the acquisition of and the training in TreeAge or Arena is worthwhile for more complex models. Double implementation is a practicable validation technique that should be conducted to ensure correct model implementation.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Wolters Kluwer Health | Adis in its journal PharmacoEconomics.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Remco Bouckaert).
Related research
Keywords:
Find related papers by JEL classification: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods D - Microeconomics I - Health, Education, and Welfare Z - Other Special Topics I1 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health I19 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Other I18 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Government Policy; Regulation; Public Health I11 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - Analysis of Health Care Markets