scholarly journals SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS ON FORTHCOMING AMENDMENTS TO HTA IN POLAND

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 358-359
Author(s):  
Anna Zawada
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Additional Information

In reference to the article A Decade of Health Technology Assessment in Poland by I. Lipska et al. (1), I would like to provide you with some comments and additional information on the changes in reimbursement policies in the Polish healthcare system currently taking place, which is likely to lead to increased number of health technology assessments (HTAs) of medical devices (MDs).

PP206 Health Technology Assessment Guidance In The United Kingdom: Addressing Issues Specific To Medical Devices

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 26-26
Author(s):  
Scott Gibson ◽  
Sita Saunders ◽  
Amanda Hansson Hedblom ◽  
Maximilian Blüher ◽  
Rafael Torrejon Torres ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Economic Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Training Costs ◽  
Medical Technologies ◽  
The United Kingdom

IntroductionThe United Kingdom spends approximately GBP4.2 billion (USD5.6 billion; EUR4.7 billion) each year on medical devices, but healthcare providers receive little health technology assessment (HTA) guidance on cost-effective device procurement. Our objective was to assess the availability of HTA guidance for medical technologies and to identify key challenges related to the economic assessment of these technologies.MethodsNational Institute for Health and Care Excellence technology appraisal (TA) and Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP) appraisals published online between November 2009 and October 2020 were identified. The “case for adoption” recommendation, type of devices, and critiques of economic analyses for each MTEP appraisal were extracted and categorized.ResultsIn comparison to 415 publicly available TAs for pharmaceuticals, only 45 medical technologies have been appraised through the MTEP. MTEP-submitted technologies can be categorized into diagnostic (7), monitoring (3), prophylaxis (5), therapeutic (28), and other (2). Furthermore, 11 were implants, seven were used by patients, and 27 had provider interaction. Major points of MTEP criticism were a failure to model cost consequences, training costs, and organizational impact. There was also the barrier of transferring costs across budgeting divisions.ConclusionsIn comparison to HTA guidance for pharmaceuticals, there is a dearth of medical device guidance. Therapeutic and implantable devices appear to be disproportionately overrepresented in the MTEP process. This may be because their appraisal is most akin to pharmaceuticals, for which HTA processes are well established. To encourage more HTAs of medical devices, HTA guidance should elaborate on issues specifically related to medical devices.

scholarly journals Health technology assessment in Brazil: what do healthcare system players think about it?

2011 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 198-205 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Bosi Ferraz ◽  
Patricia Coelho de Soárez ◽  
Paola Zucchi
Keyword(s):  
Health Economics ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
International Health ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Public And Private ◽  
The Government

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVES: The health technology assessment (HTA) process has been developed locally. The aim of this study was to describe, analyze and compare the opinions of participants in international health economics symposia about the HTA process used in Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING: Observational cross-sectional study at the 2006 and 2008 International Health Economics Symposia, in São Paulo. METHODS: A structured questionnaire was applied. For the statistical analysis, the percentage distribution for each category was calculated, and variables were compared using tests for two-sample proportion hypotheses. RESULTS: Totals of 153 and 74 participants answered the 2006 and 2008 surveys, respectively. The response rate was better for the 2006 survey (67.1%) than for the 2008 survey (31.8%). Most interviewees were between the ages of 30 and 49 years and were managers in the healthcare system. Most of them considered that the current HTA process was incomplete and unable to meet the needs of the healthcare system. They mentioned the government, academia and experts as the three main groups of people who should be involved in the process, and selected efficiency/effectiveness, safety and disease relevance as the three main criteria to be considered in the HTA process. There is a trend towards developing decentralized regionalized HTA processes, with separate assessment and decision-making for the public and private systems. CONCLUSIONS: The HTA concept is well known. Healthcare system players feel that the process has methodological limitations. Additional surveys are needed to track the HTA process and its application in Brazil.

Innovative medical devices and hospital decision making: a study comparing the views of hospital pharmacists and physicians

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (3) ◽  
pp. 257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathilde Billaux ◽  
Isabelle Borget ◽  
Patrice Prognon ◽  
Judith Pineau ◽  
Nicolas Martelli
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Local Health ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Hospital Pharmacists ◽  
Current Practices

Objectives Many university hospitals have developed local health technology assessment processes to guide informed decisions about new medical devices. However, little is known about stakeholders’ perceptions and assessment of innovative devices. Herein, we investigated the perceptions regarding innovative medical devices of their chief users (physicians and surgeons), as well as those of hospital pharmacists, because they are responsible for the purchase and management of sterile medical devices. We noted the evaluation criteria used to assess and select new medical devices and suggestions for improving local health technology assessment processes indicated by the interviewees. Methods We randomly selected 18 physicians and surgeons (nine each) and 18 hospital pharmacists from 18 French university hospitals. Semistructured interviews were conducted between October 2012 and August 2013. Responses were coded separately by two researchers. Results Physicians and surgeons frequently described innovative medical devices as ‘new’, ‘safe’ and ‘effective’, whereas hospital pharmacists focused more on economic considerations and considered real innovative devices to be those for which no equivalent could be found on the market. No significant difference in evaluation criteria was found between these groups of professionals. Finally, hospital pharmacists considered the management of conflicts of interests in local health technology assessment processes to be an issue, whereas physicians and surgeons did not. Conclusions The present study highlights differences in perceptions related to professional affiliation. The findings suggest several ways in which current practices for local health technology assessment in French university hospitals could be improved and studied. What is known about the topic? Hospitals are faced with ever-growing demands for innovative and costly medical devices. To help hospital management deal with technology acquisition issues, hospital-based health technology assessment has been developed to support decisions. However, little is known about the different perceptions of innovative medical devices among practitioners and how different perceptions may affect decision making. What does this paper add? This paper compares and understands the perceptions of two groups of health professionals concerning innovative devices in the university hospital environment. What are the implications for practitioners? Such a comparison of viewpoints could facilitate improvements in current practices and decision-making processes in local health technology assessment for these medical products.

Austria: History of health technology assessment during the past 20 years

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 74-81 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claudia Wild
Keyword(s):  
Decision Support ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Healthcare System ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
System Analysis ◽  
High Volume ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Public Understanding ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Research Activities

Objectives: The aim of this article is to describe and analyze the stages toward recognition and implementation of health technology assessment (HTA).Methods: System analysis of structures and institutions and their use of HTA.Results: Austria is a latecomer in implementing evaluations/HTA as decision support. It can to a certain degree absorb the increasing international knowledge. Austria had a long time to observe the successes and failures of HTA in other countries and to learn from other countries. The implementation of HTA within the Austrian healthcare system ran through stages of uptake: starting 1989 with a systematic review on international activities, first international networking and collaboration since 1991, proposed assessments until the late 1990s, followed by reactive assessments on demand mostly on high volume and costly technologies since then. Since 2000, HTA is used on a regular basis for investment and reimbursement decisions by several players, namely the Ministry of Health, the Social Insurance and hospital cooperations. In 2006, the Austrian HTA-institute was founded.Conclusions: It took approximately 15 years from first research activities in HTA to an institutionalization. HTA in Austria is not only product- but also process-oriented: The actual production of assessments for decision support is as important as the structuring and accompanying of the process of decisions making. In addition, shaping the public understanding of science (characterized by the intrinsic belief that all new medical interventions provide added value to the healthcare system) is part of Austrian HTA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document