scholarly journals Economic Evaluation In Portugal – Establishment of The National Health Technology Assessment System (Sinats)

2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (7) ◽  
pp. A452
Author(s):  
P. Cortegaça ◽  
F. Silva ◽  
D. Viana ◽  
R. Ramos ◽  
J. Martins
Author(s):  
Konstantinos Zisis ◽  
Panagiota Naoum ◽  
Kostas Athanasakis

Abstract Objective To classify, analyze, and compare published guidelines for economic evaluation within health technology assessment (HTA) in European countries and highlight differences and similarities. Methods We performed a literature review to identify published guidance for the conduct and assessment of economic evaluation studies that are undertaken within the context of HTA processes in European countries. Organizations and working groups were identified via the ISPOR, INAHTA, and EUnetHTA databases. Following the identification of official documents, we performed a qualitative content analysis to highlight discrepancies or common practices under the following categories: comparator, perspective on costs/benefits, time horizon, economic evaluation method, instrument used for utility measurement, outcome measure, source for efficacy, modeling, sensitivity analysis, discounting, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Results A total of nineteen guidance documents were identified (in English) providing data for the analysis in nineteen countries. The comparative content analysis identified common practices in most countries regarding the approaches to the choice of comparator, source of data, the preferred economic evaluation method, the option for a lifetime analytical horizon, discounting, and the choice of key outcome measure—for which, most countries recommend the use of the EQ-5D instrument. Differences were mainly found in the choice of perspective, dealing with uncertainty and sensitivity analysis, the use of end points, and the required use of modeling. Conclusions The use of economic evaluation constitutes one of the key pillars of the HTA process in Europe. Although a methodological convergence has occurred during the last few years, notable differences still remain.


2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Don Husereau ◽  
Deborah A. Marshall ◽  
Adrian R. Levy ◽  
Stuart Peacock ◽  
Jeffrey S. Hoch

Background: Many jurisdictions delivering health care, including Canada, have developed guidance for conducting economic evaluation, often in the service of larger health technology assessment (HTA) and reimbursement processes. Like any health intervention, personalized medical (PM) interventions have costs and consequences that must be considered by reimbursement authorities with limited resources. However, current approaches to economic evaluation to support decision making have been largely developed from population-based approaches to therapy—that is, evaluating the costs and consequences of single interventions across single populations. This raises the issue as to whether these methods, as they are or more refined, are adequate to address more targeted approaches to therapy, or whether a new paradigm for assessing value in PM is required.Objectives: We describe specific issues relevant to the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM and assess whether current guidance for economic evaluation is sufficient to support decision making for PM interventions.Methods: Issues were identified through literature review and informal interviews with national and international experts (n = 10) in these analyses. This article elaborates on findings and discussion at a workshop held in Ottawa, Canada, in January 2012.Results: Specific issues related to better guiding economic evaluation of personalized medicine interventions include: how study questions are developed, populations are characterized, comparators are defined, effectiveness is evaluated, outcomes are valued and how resources are measured. Diagnostics-based PM also highlights the need for analyses outside of economic evaluation to support decision making.Conclusions: The consensus of this group of experts is that the economic evaluation of diagnostics-based PM may not require a new paradigm. However, greater complexity means that existing approaches and tools may require improvement to undertake these more analyses.


Author(s):  
Vladimir Vukovic ◽  
Carlo Favaretti ◽  
Walter Ricciardi ◽  
Chiara de Waure

Objectives:Evaluation is crucial for integration of e-Health/m-Health into healthcare systems and health technology assessment (HTA) could offer sound methodological basis for these evaluations. Aim of this study was to look for HTA reports on e-Health/m-Health technologies and to analyze their transparency, consistency and thoroughness, with the goal to detect areas that need improvement.Methods:PubMed, ISI-WOS, and University of York – Centre for Reviews and Dissemination–electronic databases were searched to identify reports on e-Health/m-Health technologies, published up until April 1, 2016. The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) checklist was used to evaluate transparency and consistency of included reports. Thoroughness was assessed by checking the presence of domains suggested by the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) HTA Core Model.Results:Twenty-eight reports published between 1999 and 2015 were included. Most were delivered by non-European countries (71.4 percent) and only 35.7 percent were classified as full reports. All the HTA reports defined the scope of research whereas more than 80 percent provided author details, summary, discussed findings, and conclusion. On the contrary, policy and research questions were clearly defined in around 30 percent and 50 percent of reports. With respect to the EUnetHTA Core Model, around 70 percent of reports dealt with effectiveness and economic evaluation, more than 50 percent described health problem and approximately 40 percent organizational and social aspects.Conclusions:E-Health/m-Health technologies are increasingly present in the field of HTA. Yet, our review identified several missing elements. Most of the reports failed to respond to relevant assessment components, especially ethical, social and organizational implications.


2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 168-169
Author(s):  
Francesco Faggiano ◽  
Martina Andellini ◽  
Federico Nocchi ◽  
Carlo Capussotto ◽  
Francesca Sabusco ◽  
...  

INTRODUCTION:The purpose of the study was to evaluate different type and manufacturers of intensive care ventilators in order to support the healthcare decision-making process about the choice to adopt the best available technology for ventilation of pediatric patient in intensive care units at Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital.METHODS:The technology assessment process was developed by using a new methodology, the Decision-oriented Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (DoHTA), a new implementation of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) CoreModel, integrating the Analytic Hierarchy Process (1). A literature review was carried out to gather evidence on safety and overall effectiveness of different kind of intensive care ventilators, with several ventilation modalities and strategies. The synthesis of scientific evidence, and results of the specific context analysis resulted in the definition of components of the decisional hierarchy structure, consisting in detailed characteristics of the technology's performances covering the aspects on feasibility, safety, efficacy, costs, and organizational and technical characteristics of the technology. A subgroup of these indicators has been included in a checklist form for the evaluation of different type and manufacturers of intensive care ventilators, each of which was tested in three independent runs performed in three different departments. In addition, an economic evaluation was also carried out.RESULTS:Preliminary DoHTA results showed that the domains with the highest impacts within the evaluation are safety and clinical effectiveness (34.8 percent and 25.7 percent, respectively) followed by organizational aspects, technical characteristics of technology and costs and economic evaluation. The final objective is to define the alternatives’ ranking through a comparison between alternative technologies’ performances.CONCLUSIONS:The technology assessment project allowed to identify strengths and limits of the most recent intensive care ventilator’ models in the specific contexts of use by involving all health professionals interested, and eventually identify the best option for the hospital.


2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 24-24
Author(s):  
Huguette Lhuillier-Nkandjeu ◽  
Michèle Morin-Surroca

INTRODUCTION:Mechanical thrombectomy (MT) is used in patients with acute ischaemic stroke due to occlusion of a proximal cerebral artery. Over the years endovascular techniques have been used to re-canalise blocked vessels, but are not currently reimbursed by National Health Insurance in France.The aim was to assess the efficacy and safety of MT in combination with intravenous tissue plasminogen activator (IV t-PA), or as an alternative to it, in adults with an acute ischaemic stroke who are not eligible for thrombolysis or in whom thrombolysis has failed; to support the reimbursement decision by National Health Insurance.METHODS:Within the scope of The European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), a rapid assessment of “Endovascular therapy using devices for acute ischaemic stroke” was jointly produced with Haute Autorité de santé (HAS) as a reviewer.RESULTS:The EUnetHTA report provided a systematic review based on eight randomized controlled trials (RCT) for effectiveness and all available published data for safety.To produce its assessment, HAS has adapted the EUnetHTA report by: 1.Updating the systematic literature review including the latest published trials2.Retaining the subgroup analysis of the five most recent trials considered more relevant in the EUnetHTA report for the assessment of effectiveness3.Analysing specifically the different endovascular interventions studied in the five RCTs4.Taking into account contributions from stakeholders.CONCLUSIONS:This horizontal collaboration among European HTA doers has facilitated and shortened the assessment of the clinical benefit of this technology, confirming the relevance of EUnetHTA cooperation.This clinical assessment of thrombectomy is to be completed by the evaluation of its organizational impact in the management of acute ischemic stroke.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 1245-1257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Kennedy-Martin ◽  
Bernhard Slaap ◽  
Michael Herdman ◽  
Mandy van Reenen ◽  
Tessa Kennedy-Martin ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Several multi-attribute utility instruments (MAUIs) are available from which utilities can be derived for use in cost-utility analysis (CUA). This study provides a review of recommendations from national health technology assessment (HTA) agencies regarding the choice of MAUIs. Methods A list was compiled of HTA agencies that provide or refer to published official pharmacoeconomic (PE) guidelines for pricing, reimbursement or market access. The guidelines were reviewed for recommendations on the indirect calculation of utilities and categorized as: a preference for a specific MAUI; providing no MAUI preference, but providing examples of suitable MAUIs and/or recommending the use of national value sets; and recommending CUA, but not providing examples of MAUIs. Results Thirty-four PE guidelines were included for review. MAUIs named for use in CUA: EQ-5D (n = 29 guidelines), the SF-6D (n = 11), HUI (n = 10), QWB (n = 3), AQoL (n = 2), CHU9D (n = 1). EQ-5D was a preferred MAUI in 15 guidelines. Alongside the EQ-5D, the HUI was a preferred MAUI in one guideline, with DALY disability weights mentioned in another. Fourteen guidelines expressed no preference for a specific MAUI, but provided examples: EQ-5D (n = 14), SF-6D (n = 11), HUI (n = 9), QWB (n = 3), AQoL (n = 2), CHU9D (n = 1). Of those that did not specify a particular MAUI, 12 preferred calculating utilities using national preference weights. Conclusions The EQ-5D, HUI, and SF-6D were the three MAUIs most frequently mentioned in guidelines. The most commonly cited MAUI (in 85% of PE guidelines) was EQ-5D, either as a preferred MAUI or as an example of a suitable MAUI for use in CUA in HTA.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document