Are Key Principles for improved health technology assessment supported and used by health technology assessment organizations?

2010 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Peter J. Neumann ◽  
Michael F. Drummond ◽  
Bengt Jönsson ◽  
Bryan R. Luce ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Societal Perspective ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Working Group ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Previously, our group—the International Working Group for HTA Advancement—proposed a set of fifteen Key Principles that could be applied to health technology assessment (HTA) programs in different jurisdictions and across a range of organizations and perspectives. In this commentary, we investigate the extent to which these principles are supported and used by fourteen selected HTA organizations worldwide. We find that some principles are broadly supported: examples include being explicit about HTA goals and scope; considering a wide range of evidence and outcomes; and being unbiased and transparent. Other principles receive less widespread support: examples are addressing issues of generalizability and transferability; being transparent on the link between HTA findings and decision-making processes; considering a full societal perspective; and monitoring the implementation of HTA findings. The analysis also suggests a lack of consensus in the field about some principles—for example, considering a societal perspective. Our study highlights differences in the uptake of key principles for HTA and indicates considerable room for improvement for HTA organizations to adopt principles identified to reflect good HTA practices. Most HTA organizations espouse certain general concepts of good practice—for example, assessments should be unbiased and transparent. However, principles that require more intensive follow-up—for example, monitoring the implementation of HTA findings—have received little support and execution.

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.

PP100 Unraveling Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment In Brazil

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 57-57
Author(s):  
Ricardo Bertoglio Cardoso ◽  
Luciane Cruz ◽  
Marina Aziz ◽  
Sandro Miguel ◽  
Mírian Cohen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Importance Score ◽  
Score Threshold ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Work Production ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Survey Questionnaires

IntroductionIn Brazil, hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) units have been implemented countrywide since early 2000 to improve decision-making processes. Multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) can provide a deeper understanding of a given subject. The present study used MCDA to evaluate capacity building among HB-HTA units in Brazil.MethodsThis study analyzed preliminary data from a survey developed and sent to all HB-HTA units in Brazil in 2018. The survey comprised 116 questions covering a wide range of aspects. Initially, an expert panel was organized, and 46 objective questions (out of 116) were selected by four experts. Next, these experts classified the selected questions by weighting them according to their relative importance. A Likert scale was used to identify the levels of importance, which were converted to weights ranging from zero to one. The experts then defined a final importance score threshold of 60 percent to classify units as fully operational. Grades below this threshold indicated the need for a more detailed evaluation. Of the 80 survey questionnaires, 23 were evaluated by the proposed method.ResultsImportance weights for each classification were defined as follows: personnel (25%); level of expertise (31%); work production (31%); and infrastructure (13%). The mean final importance score for the HB-HTA units was 68 percent. The maximum and minimum scores achieved were 95 percent and 15 percent, respectively. The HB-HTA units had been established for an average of 6 years, and ten of the 23 units were classified as fully operational.ConclusionsThe multicriteria method presented by this study simplified HB-HTA unit evaluation, reducing the subjectivity of results. Final importance scores for each unit's categories indicated which areas need improvement. Results from the study indicated that infrastructure and personnel could be greatly enhanced, even though the production profile was satisfactory.

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.

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.

OP318 Health Technology Assessment And Decision-Making Processes: The Purchase Of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Technology

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 13-13
Author(s):  
Maria Maia
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Decision Making Processes

IntroductionMedical devices play an essential role in health care, but they are also a leading causes of increasing healthcare expenditures. The purchase of technologies and the determination of how and when they should be used are among the most important decisions made by decision-makers, at the institutional level.The present research focuses on the Portuguese health system and sheds light on the characterization of decision-making process by those involved in Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) purchases.MethodsTo characterize the decision-making process, results from forty questionnaires and twenty-seven semi-structured interviews with key decision-makers were merged, using a mixed method approach. To assess competences for decision-making, a questionnaire was applied, and Exploratory and Confirmatory Factorial Analysis conducted.ResultsCost and suppliers’ characteristics are seen as the most important indicators to guide decisions. The decision is undertaken by a committee, in a bottom-up process, characterized by a bounded rationality, influenced by intuition and a consultant decision-maker. The reasoning and justification for selection of the committee members is unclear. The decision process is considered to be bureaucratic, time-consuming and long. Patients are negatively perceived as stakeholders in the process. Few studies were performed (mostly related to the workload of the Radiology Department) to support the decision and no national or international health technology assessment (HTA) study was used in the process, to guide decisions. Decision-makers have limited knowledge and training in areas of decision-making in the areas of health informatics, health economics and especially HTA. This may limit their ability to truly understand the future implications of their purchase decisions.ConclusionsTo foster HTA in decision-making processes, recommendations are made, in particular, to: (i) establish an HTA in-house unit, able to carry out studies considering the hospital context and aiming to inform managerial local decisions (ii) promote a team comprised of technology assessment multidisciplinary researchers but also professionals from the health institution able to carry out HTA studies (iii) foster common languages and values to increase uptake of HTA studies.

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.

scholarly journals HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT FOR DECISION MAKING IN LATIN AMERICA: GOOD PRACTICE PRINCIPLES

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 241-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrés Pichon-Riviere ◽  
Natalie C. Soto ◽  
Federico Ariel Augustovski ◽  
Sebastián García Martí ◽  
Laura Sampietro-Colom
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Latin America ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
International Level ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Main Challenge

Objectives:The aim of this study was to identify good practice principles for health technology assessment (HTA) that are the most relevant and of highest priority for application in Latin America and to identify potential barriers to their implementation in the region.Methods:HTA good practice principles proposed at the international level were identified and then explored during a deliberative process in a forum of assessors, funders, and product manufacturers.Results:Forty-two representatives from ten Latin American countries participated. Good practice principles proposed at the international level were considered valid and potentially relevant to Latin America. Five principles were identified as priority and with the greatest potential to be strengthened at this time: transparency in the production of HTA, involvement of relevant stakeholders in the HTA process, mechanisms to appeal decisions, clear priority-setting processes in HTA, and a clear link between HTA and decision making. The main challenge identified was to find a balance between the application of these principles and the available resources in a way that would not detract from the production of reports and adaptation to the needs of decision makers.Conclusions:The main recommendation was to progress gradually in strengthening HTA and its link to decision making by developing appropriate processes for each country, without trying to impose, in the short-term, standards taken from examples at the international level without adequate adaptation of these to local contexts.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document