scholarly journals Similarities and Differences in Health Technology Assessment Systems and Implications for Coverage Decisions: Evidence from 32 Countries

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Maria Fontrier ◽  
Erica Visintin ◽  
Panos Kanavos
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Systems ◽  
Similarities And Differences

Development of archetypes for non-ranking classification and comparison of European National Health Technology Assessment systems

Health Policy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 113 (3) ◽  
pp. 305-312 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicola Allen ◽  
Franz Pichler ◽  
Tina Wang ◽  
Sundip Patel ◽  
Sam Salek
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
National Health ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Systems

scholarly journals How innovation can be defined, evaluated and rewarded in health technology assessment

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla ◽  
Jaime Espin ◽  
David Epstein
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Assessment Systems ◽  
Degree Of Innovation

Abstract Background What constitutes innovation in health technologies can be defined and measured in a number of ways and it has been widely researched and published about. However, while many countries mention it as a criterion for pricing or reimbursement of health technologies, countries differ widely in how they define and operationalise it. Methods We performed a literature review, using a snowballing search. In this paper, we explore how innovation has been defined in the literature in relation to health technology assessment. We also describe how a selection of countries (England, France, Italy, Spain and Japan) take account of innovation in their health technology assessment frameworks and explore the key methodologies that can capture it as a dimension of value in a new health technology. We propose a way of coming to, and incorporating into health technology assessment systems, a definition of innovation for health technologies that is independent of other dimensions of value that they already account for in their systems, such as clinical benefit. We use Spain as an illustrative example of how innovation might be operationalised as a criterion for decision making in health technology assessment. Results The countries analysed here can be divided into 2 groups with respect to how they define innovation. France, Japan and Italy use features such as severity, unmet need and therapeutic added value as indicators of the degree of innovation of a health technology, while England, Spain consider the degree of innovation as a separate and additional criterion from others. In the case of Spain, a notion of innovation might be constructed around concepts of `step-change’, `convenience’, `strength of evidence base’ and `impact on future research & development’. Conclusions If innovation is to be used as operational criteria for adoption, pricing and reimbursement of health technologies, the concept must be clearly defined, and it ought to be independent from other value dimensions already captured in their health technology assessment systems.

Methods, procedures, and contextual characteristics of health technology assessment and health policy decision making: Comparison of health technology assessment agencies in Germany, United Kingdom, France, and Sweden

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (03) ◽  
pp. 305-314 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruth Schwarzer ◽  
Uwe Siebert
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Health Policy Decision ◽  
Policy Decision Making ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Domain Similarity

Objectives:The objectives of this study were (i) to develop a systematic framework for describing and comparing different features of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies, (ii) to identify and describe similarities and differences between the agencies, and (iii) to draw conclusions both for producers and users of HTA in research, policy, and practice.Methods:We performed a systematic literature search, added information from HTA agencies, and developed a conceptual framework comprising eight main domains: organization, scope, processes, methods, dissemination, decision, implementation, and impact. We grouped relevant items of these domains in an evidence table and chose five HTA agencies to test our framework:DAHTA@DIMDI, HAS, IQWiG, NICE, and SBU. Item and domain similarity was assessed using the percentage of identical characteristics in pairwise comparisons across agencies. Results were interpreted across agencies by demonstrating similarities and differences.Results:Based on 306 included documents, we identified 90 characteristics of eight main domains appropriate for our framework. After applying the framework to the five agencies, we were able to show 40 percent similarities in “dissemination,” 38 percent in “scope,” 35 percent in “organization,” 29 percent in “methods,” 26 percent in “processes,” 23 percent in “impact,” 19 percent in “decision,” and 17 percent in “implementation.”Conclusion:We found considerably more differences than similarities of HTA features across agencies and countries. Our framework and comparison provides insights and clarification into the need for harmonization. Our findings could serve as descriptive database facilitating communication between producers and users.

scholarly journals Strengthening health technology assessment systems in the global south: a comparative analysis of the HTA journeys of China, India and South Africa

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1527556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim MacQuilkan ◽  
Peter Baker ◽  
Laura Downey ◽  
Francis Ruiz ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Global South ◽  
Assessment Systems

scholarly journals EARLY AWARENESS AND ALERT SYSTEMS: AN OVERVIEW OF EUROSCAN METHODS

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 301-307 ◽  
Author(s):  
Iñaki Gutierrez-Ibarluzea ◽  
Sue Simpson ◽  
Gaizka Benguria-Arrate ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Systems ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Delphi Technique ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Customer Requirements ◽  
Sustainable Systems ◽  
Similarities And Differences

Objectives: Early awareness and alert (EAA) activities are increasingly recognized to be an important component of the health technology assessment (HTA) process. Sharing information on methods used in this discipline is vital to ensure the development of sustainable systems. The objectives of this study is to outline the approach taken to share the different methods that members of the EuroScan International Network use by producing a methods toolkit; and to provide an overview of the similarities and differences in methods adopted by EAA systems.Methods: A Delphi technique was used to develop the methods toolkit. Structured questionnaires were used to identify the sources used in the identification of emerging technologies and to determine the methods used by agencies to carry out EAA activities.Results: A methods toolkit incorporating guidance on all of the stages described by EuroScan members was produced. The toolkit and an accompanying checklist presents users with different methods that can be adopted to suit their needs. The comparative analysis demonstrates that different methods are being used by EAA systems dependent on resources available and customer requirements. Differences in identification, filtration, prioritization, and assessment are apparent along with the role of collaborators in these processes.Conclusions: The methods used by EAA systems are not homogeneous resulting in a toolkit constructed on the basis of “one size doesn't fit all.” Methods in this discipline are developing continually to accommodate changes in health systems and the HTA world. Differences between agencies and the sharing of ideas and experiences enable EAA agencies to adapt to these developments.

Versorgungsforschung in der Klinischen Neuropsychologie – eine Standortbestimmung

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Heel ◽  
Sonja Fischer ◽  
Stefan Fischer ◽  
Tobias Grässer ◽  
Ellen Hämmerling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Empirische Forschung

Zunächst führt dieser Artikel in die wesentlichen Begrifflichkeiten und Zielstellungen der Versorgungsforschung ein. Er befasst sich dann mit der Frage, wie die einzelnen Teildisziplinen der Versorgungsforschung, (1) die Bedarfsforschung, (2) die Inanspruchnahmeforschung, (3) die Organisationsforschung, (4) das Health Technology Assessment, (5) die Versorgungsökonomie, (6) die Qualitätsforschung und zuletzt (7) die Versorgungsepidemiologie konzeptionell zu fassen sind, und wie sie für neuropsychologische Anliegen ausformuliert werden müssen. In diesem Zusammenhang werden die in den einzelnen Bereichen jeweils vorliegenden versorgungsrelevanten Studienergebnisse referiert. Soweit es zulässig ist, werden Bedarfe für die Versorgungsforschung und Versorgungspraxis in der Neurorehabilitation daraus abgeleitet und Anregungen für die weitere empirische Forschung formuliert. Der Artikel bezieht sich – entsprechend seines Anliegens – ausschließlich auf Studien, die sich mit der Situation der deutschen Neurorehabilitation befassen.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document