scholarly journals Review of National Health Technology Assessment Reports on Treatment of Severe Haemophilia A

2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (7) ◽  
pp. A602
Author(s):  
I Odnoletkova
Author(s):  
Miriam Luhnen ◽  
Sari Susanna Ormstad ◽  
Anne Willemsen ◽  
Chaienna Schreuder-Morel ◽  
Catharina Helmink ◽  
...  

Abstract Objectives The European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) was established in 2006 and comprises over eighty organizations from thirty European countries. In its fifth project phase (Joint Action 3), EUnetHTA set up a quality management system (QMS) to improve the efficiency and standardization of joint work. This article presents EUnetHTA's new QMS and outlines experiences and challenges during its implementation. Methods Several working groups defined processes and methods to support assessment teams in creating high-quality assessment reports. Existing guidelines, templates, and tools were refined and missing parts were newly created and integrated into the new QMS framework. EUnetHTA has contributed to Health Technology Assessment (HTA) capacity building through training and knowledge sharing. Continuous evaluation helped to identify gaps and shortcomings in processes and structures. Results Based on a common quality management concept and defined development and revision procedures, twenty-seven partner organizations jointly developed and maintained around forty standard operating procedures and other components of the QMS. All outputs were incorporated into a web-based platform, the EUnetHTA Companion Guide, which was launched in May 2018. Concerted efforts of working groups were required to ensure consistency and avoid duplication. Conclusions With the establishment of a QMS for jointly produced assessment reports, EUnetHTA has taken a significant step toward a sustainable model for scientific and technical collaboration within European HTA. However, the definition of processes and methods meeting the numerous requirements of healthcare systems across Europe remains an ongoing and challenging task.


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