Abstract

Objective: Alcohol consumption was responsible for approximately 2.6 million deaths globally in 2019, positioning it as one of the leading preventable causes of mortality. This Perspective article critically assesses an economic evaluation comparing the cost-effectiveness of nalmefene combined with psychological support versus psychological support alone for treating alcohol dependence.
Method: A hybrid quality appraisal tool, drawing on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for economic evaluations, was employed to systematically assess the methodological rigour, strengths, and limitations of the study.
Results: The analysis identifies notable limitations in the economic evaluation, particularly concerning its assessment of clinical effectiveness, study design, modelling, and analysis. It is recommended that future research incorporates robust evidence on the therapeutic efficacy of nalmefene, with sensitivity analyses prioritising variations in this critical parameter. Additionally, when adopting a societal perspective, the evaluation should account for non-clinical interventions, such as alcohol taxation and adjustments to the legal purchasing age, which have demonstrated cost-effectiveness in reducing alcohol dependence.
Conclusion: While the evaluation suggests that nalmefene may be cost-effective within the UK healthcare context, further research is essential to integrate contemporary evidence on its efficacy. Moreover, if a societal perspective is adopted, the analysis should be expanded to include cost-effective, non-pharmaceutical interventions aimed at reducing alcohol dependence, ensuring a more comprehensive assessment of its broader societal implications.