scholarly journals Resource allocation and health technology assessment in Australia: Views from the local level

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisselle Gallego ◽  
Kees van Gool ◽  
Dianne Kelleher
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Objectives:Several studies have shown that a key determinant of successful health technology assessment (HTA) uptake is a clear, fair, and consistent decision-making process for the approval and introduction of health technologies. The aim of this study was to gauge healthcare providers' and managers' perceptions of local level decision making and determine whether these processes offer a conducive environment for HTA. An Area Health Service (AHS) aimed to use the results of this study to help design a new process of technology assessment and decision making.Methods:An online survey was sent to all health service managers and healthcare providers working in one AHS in Sydney, Australia. Questions related to perceptions of current health technology decisions in participants' own institution/facility and opinions on key criteria for successful decision-making processes.Results:Less than a third of participants agreed with the statements that local decision-making processes were appropriate, easy to understand, evidence-based, fair, or consistently applied. Decisions were reportedly largely influenced by total cost considerations as well as by the central state health departments and the Area executive.Conclusions:Although there are renewed initiatives in HTA in Australia, there is a risk that such investments will not be productive unless policy makers also examine the decision-making contexts within which HTA can successfully be implemented. The results of this survey show that this is especially true at the local level and that any HTA initiative should be accompanied by efforts to improve decision-making processes.

OP114 The Public's Role In Understanding The Value Of Health Technologies

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 43-44
Author(s):  
Tania Stafinski ◽  
Jackie Street ◽  
Devidas Menon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Definition Of

Introduction:Increasingly, health technology assessment (HTA) organizations have instituted mechanisms for involving patients in assessment and review processes. The reasons are obvious—to understand the “patient experience” with a disease and to ensure that patient perspectives are considered during deliberations about the value of new treatments. More recently there have been efforts to engage the public in HTAs and HTA-informed decision-making processes. However, the goals of these efforts have not been well articulated. This may be attributable to the lack of a shared definition of “the public”. The objective of this study was to develop a common understanding of the term “the public” within the context of HTA.Methods:The following were conducted: a survey of HTA organizations; a systematic review; consultation with Health Technology Assessment international's Special Interest Group on Patient and Citizen Involvement; and a workshop comprising representatives from patient organizations, industry, and HTA bodies in Canada.Results:In many HTA processes, the terms “public” and “patients” are synonymous. Definitions found in scholarly articles vary and depend on the rationale for involving the public in a particular issue. Through consultations it became clear that, in the context of HTA, the definition depends on understanding what is missing from current deliberations around the value of new health technologies. There was consensus among workshop participants that: (i) “patients” and “the public” are not the same; (ii) the role of the public may be to ensure societal values are reflected in HTAs and HTA-informed decision-making processes (e.g. serving an audit function); and (iii) a legitimate definition of “the public” could be: “A non-aligned community member with no commercial or professional interest in the HTA process who is not a patient or member of a stakeholder group”.Conclusions:Consensus on the use of the terms “patient” and “public” will support rigorous, evidence-based public and patient engagement in HTA. The proposed definition indicates a way forward in this debate.

PP138 Current Status Of Healthcare Decision Making And Future Perspective Of The Health Technology Assessment Implementation Roadmap In Turkey

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 16-17
Author(s):  
Enver Kagan Atikeler ◽  
Ahmad Nader Fasseeh ◽  
Bert Leufkens ◽  
Wim Goettsch
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Healthcare Decision ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Economic Decision Making ◽  
Healthcare Decision Making ◽  
Decision Making Processes

IntroductionTurkey's health reforms, which started in 2003, have led to increased access to health care and pharmaceuticals as well as rising public pharmaceutical expenditures. The need to improve healthcare decision making by implementing health technology assessment (HTA) has become an important priority for Turkey. This study sought to provide a tailor-made HTA implementation roadmap, drawing on insights from national stakeholders.Our study aimed to describe the current HTA environment in Turkey and to explore long-term perspectives and suggestions from a wide spectrum of Turkish stakeholders regarding the preferred status of HTA in ten years (by 2029).MethodsWe conducted an online survey using a questionnaire previously applied in other HTA research. We assessed the current evaluation of medical and economic decision-making processes and examined the need for HTA. We also ascertained stakeholder perspectives on potential developments that can be done together with policymakers, representatives of pharmaceutical companies, and patient organizations. We also included general information about the pharmaceutical market and decision making processes in Turkey.ResultsThe survey was sent to various stakeholders from different areas within the health system. Additional face-to-face interviews were conducted with a few respondents to clarify some of their answers. A total of twenty-seven Turkish stakeholders completed the survey. Of these, twenty-one (78%) participants were employed in the public sector and six (22%) were from the private sector. The majority of the participants would introduce HTA for all new health technologies being considered for public reimbursement and institute an additional review process for currently reimbursed technologies. Most of the respondents considered that only new technologies with significant budget impact should be evaluated in the next ten years.ConclusionsIt is clear that Turkey needs to implement an HTA process in the future. Our study shows stakeholder expectations, which will be helpful for creating an HTA implementation roadmap, and it is clear that different stakeholders have different views and expectations about HTA implementation in Turkey. The experiences of other countries will also be helpful during the implementation process.

scholarly journals Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Appraisal Committee ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background: Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were recently introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes towards more legitimate decision-making. The EDP framework provides guidance that covers the HTA process, ie, contextual factors, installation of an appraisal committee, selecting health technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, and communication and appeal. The aims of this study were to identify the level of use of EDPs by HTA agencies, identify their needs for guidance, and to learn about best practices. Methods: A questionnaire for an online survey was developed based on the EDP framework, consisting of elements that reflect each part of the framework. The survey was sent to members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Two weeks following the invitation, a reminder was sent. The data collection took place between September-December 2018. Results: Contact persons from 27 member agencies filled out the survey (response rate: 54%), of which 25 completed all questions. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development and the critical elements regarding conducting and reporting on HTA are overall in place. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, appraisal, and communication and appeal. With regard to best practices, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) were most often mentioned. Conclusion: This is the first survey among HTA agencies regarding the use of EDPs and provides useful information for further developing a practical guide for HTA agencies around the globe. The results could support HTA agencies in improving their processes towards more legitimate decision-making, as they could serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation.

scholarly journals The concept of multi-criteria analysis of decision-making in the current system of health technology assessment in Russia

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. V. Omelyanovsky ◽  
V. K. Fedyaeva ◽  
N. Z. Musina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Current System ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Methodology ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Health Technologies

In the article, we analyze the current version of Government Regulation No. 871 where the principles of health technologies assessment (HTA) and the reimbursement strategies in Russia have been put forward. We conclude that the HTA methodology in Russia is consistent with the multi-criteria decision analysis. Recommendations on the improvement of the assessment methodology in Regulation No. 871 are provided.

THE ROLE OF PATIENT DECISION-MAKING IN EVALUATING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESMENT (LITERATURE REVIEW)

Vestnik ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 315-323
Author(s):  
Л.К. Кошербаева ◽  
З.Р. Сагындыкова ◽  
Т.Б. Егеубаев
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Giving Feedback

В условиях ограниченных бюджетов для современного здравоохранения рациональное потребление ресурсов является очень актуальной проблемой. Оценка технологий здравоохранения (ДСТБ) - комплексная оценка относительно доказанной клинической и клинико-экономической (фармаколого-экономической) эффективности и безопасности технологий здравоохранения, а также экономических, социальных и этических последствий их применения. Цель оценки технологий здравоохранения-одобрение заявленных технологий здравоохранения и включение заявленных технологий здравоохранения в перечень компенсации и информирование политиков в области здравоохранения. Следует ли применять здоровье сберегающую технологию, как ее применять и какую пользу от нее получают пациенты. Обучение экспертным знаниям о выживаемости, диагностике и лечении болезней и болезней, в том числе о методе оказания помощи (для анализа затрат и выгод), бремени болезней, выявлении пробелов в уходе, выявлении и удовлетворении потребностей. Предоставление отзывов о лечении (или отсутствии лечения и поддержки) социальных последствий заболевания способствует подходу пациентов, процессу принятия решений по мере необходимости. In the context of limited budgets for modern healthcare, rational resource consumption is a very urgent problem. Health Technology Assessment (OST) - a comprehensive assessment of the relatively proven clinical and clinical- economic (pharmacological-economic) effectiveness and safety of health technologies, as well as the economic, social and ethical consequences of their use. The purpose of the health technology assessment is to approve the claimed health technologies and include the claimed health technologies in the compensation list and inform health policy makers. It shows whether healthcare technology should be used or not, how it should be used, and how patients can benefit from it. Providing expert knowledge on the pain and burden of living, diagnosis and treatment, including the method of providing assistance (to analyze costs and benefits), the burden of diseases, identifying gaps in care, identifying and meeting needs. Giving feedback on the treatment (or lack of treatment and support) of the social consequences of the disease contributes to the decision-making process depending on the patient's attitude, needs.

scholarly journals Introducing health technology assessment in Tanzania

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 80-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gavin Surgey ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou ◽  
William Reuben ◽  
Fatima Suleman ◽  
Jacqui Miot ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Sub Saharan Africa ◽  
Essential Medicines ◽  
Revision Process ◽  
Decision Making Processes

AbstractObjectivesHealth technology assessment (HTA) is a cost-effective resource allocation tool in healthcare decision-making processes; however, its use is limited in low-income settings where countries fall short on both absorptive and technical capacity. This paper describes the journey of the introduction of HTA into decision-making processes through a case study revising the National Essential Medicines List (NEMLIT) in Tanzania. It draws lessons on establishing and strengthening transparent priority-setting processes, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.MethodsThe concept of HTA was introduced in Tanzania through revision of the NEMLIT by identifying a process for using HTA criteria and evidence-informed decision making. Training was given on using economic evidence for decision making, which was then put into practice for medicine selection for the NEMLIT. During the revision process, capacity-building workshops were held with reinforcing messages on HTA.ResultsBetween the period 2014 and 2018, HTA was introduced in Tanzania with a formal HTA committee being established and inaugurated followed by the successful completion and adoption of HTA into the NEMLIT revision process by the end of 2017. Consequently, the country is in the process of institutionalizing HTA for decision making and priority setting.ConclusionWhile the introduction of HTA process is country-specific, key lessons emerge that can provide an example to stakeholders in other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) wishing to introduce priority-setting processes into health decision making.

scholarly journals DEVELOPMENT OF THE ONTARIO DECISION FRAMEWORK: A VALUES BASED FRAMEWORK FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray Krahn ◽  
Fiona Miller ◽  
Ahmed Bayoumi ◽  
Ann-Sylvia Brooker ◽  
Frank Wagner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Optimal Decision ◽  
Decision Framework ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Attributes

Objectives:In 2007, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee (OHTAC) developed a decision framework to guide decision making around nondrug health technologies. In 2012, OHTAC commissioned a revision of this framework to enhance its usability and deepen its conceptual and theoretical foundations.Methods:The committee overseeing this work used several methods: (a) a priori consensus on guiding principles, (b) a scoping review of decision attributes and processes used globally in health technology assessment (HTA), (c) presentations by methods experts and members of review committees, and (d) committee deliberations over a period of 3 years.Results:The committee adopted a multi-criteria decision-making approach, but rejected the formal use of multi-criteria decision analysis. Three broad categories of attributes were identified: (I) context criteria attributes included factors such as stakeholders, adoption pressures from neighboring jurisdictions, and potential conflicts of interest; (II) primary appraisal criteria attributes included (i) benefits and harms, (ii) economics, and (iii) patient-centered care; (III) feasibility criteria attributes included budget impact and organizational feasibility.Conclusion:The revised Ontario Decision Framework is similar in some respects to frameworks used in HTA worldwide. Its distinctive characteristics are that: it is based on an explicit set of social values; HTA paradigms (evidence based medicine, economics, and bioethics/social science) are used to aggregate decision attributes; and that it is rooted in a theoretical framework of optimal decision making, rather than one related to broad social goals, such as health or welfare maximization.

scholarly journals Health technology assessment in Finland

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 102-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjukka Mäkelä ◽  
Risto P. Roine
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Special Responsibility ◽  
Made In

Since the 1990s, health policy makers in Finland have been supportive of evidence-based medicine and approaches to implement its results. The Finnish Office for Health Technology Assessment (Finohta) has grown from a small start in 1995 to a medium-sized health technology assessment (HTA) agency, with special responsibility in providing assessments to underpin national policies in screening. External evaluations enhanced the rapid growth. In the Finnish environment, decision making on health technologies is extremely decentralized, so Finohta has developed some practical tools for implementing HTA findings. The Managed Uptake of Medical Methods program links the hospital districts to agree on introduction of technologies. The Ohtanen database provides Finnish-language summaries of major assessments made in other countries.

scholarly journals From idealistic rookies to a regional leader: The history of health technology assessment in Poland

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 156-162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafał Niżankowski ◽  
Norbert Wilk
Keyword(s):  
Primary Care ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Public Payer

In 1989, Poland started to slowly release itself not only from the burden of a half-century of communist indoctrination and soviet exploitation, but also from the consequences of the Semashko model of healthcare organization: low doctors' salaries, primary care based on multispecialty groups, overdeveloped hospital infrastructure, and limited access to sophisticated interventions overcome by patients' unofficial payments.A few years after the 1998 workshop on health technology assessment (HTA) in Budapest, the first HTA reports were elaborated in the National Center for Quality Assessment in Health Care, which could mark the beginning of HTA in Poland. Several individuals and organizations have been involved in developing HTA, both from noncommercial and commercial standpoints.A goal to establish a national HTA agency appeared among the priorities of the Polish Ministry of Health in 2004 and was realized a year later. The Agency for HTA in Poland published guidelines on HTA and established a sound and transparent two-step (assessment-appraisal) process for preparing recommendations on public financing of both drugs and nondrug technologies. The recommendations of the Agency's Consultative Council were warmly welcomed by the public payer. However, the recent major restructuring of the Agency and new drug reimbursement decisions aroused doubts as to keeping transparency of the decision-making processes.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document