Value of comparative effectiveness reviews

[diana.papshev]

Several discussions and news items posted on our forum refer to the comparative effectiveness reviews.

The general assumption is that comparative reviews conducted by independent credible organizations (eg, DERP, AHRQ, NICE, Cochrane) serve as a great resource for those of you who are in the front-lines of formulary management and clinical policy development (for pharmacy and medical benefits).

We'd love to solicit your opinions on this subject. What do our users and experts think about the accessibility, applicability, and overall value of these reviews to your daily practice?

[SarahK]

I find them helpful. I use the AHRQ and DERP reviews, if available, to help make formulary decisions.

However, the most valuable use to me is the Consumer Reports version of DERP reviews for patients - I often refer non-clinicians with questions about step-therapy to that website. They seem to trust Consumer Reports more than me, and it give a good rationale for trying a generic first in most therapy classes.

[jeff.dunn]

Comparative reviews can be useful if they are evidence-based and specific enough. We refer to several including AHRQ and NICE - they can help validate some of our literature searches and decisions. They don't, though, take the place of our independent reviews, which are viewed as more unbiased. Often they can spark a new internal review or bring to light an issue that had previously been in the background.

[sdpharmd]

I agree DERP/AHRQ/NICE reviews help me crosscheck my lit searches and compare products if there are no head to head studies.

I don't use Cochrane because of subscription fees.

[participant1]

We found AHRQ, DERP and NICE reviews to be a very valuable source of information. The information provided in these reports is very comprehensive, robust and unbiased. It allows a decision-maker to review all of the available literature in a very concise manner. In addition, I do agree with others that these reports are not a substitution for an independent review; however, it does provide a starting point and sometimes contains the information that is not available as full text.