PP124 Smart Capability Building For Effective Patient Involvement

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 59-60
Author(s):  
Claire Davis ◽  
Sophie Hughes ◽  
Susan Myles
Keyword(s):  
Best Practice ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Capability Building ◽  
Working Together ◽  
Strategy Building

IntroductionA new Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agency, Health Technology Wales (HTW), has been established to consider the identification, appraisal, and adoption of non-medicine health technologies. This includes, for example, medical devices, surgical procedures and diagnostics. HTW recognizes the importance of effective patient and public involvement (PPI) and is building smart capabilities.MethodsHTW consulted with external organizations to identify the first steps toward effective PPI. Public partners were recruited as a priority before working together on a PPI strategy. Building smart capabilities is key to establishing effective PPI and future-proofing. HTW established a PPI Standing Group to inform HTW throughout its work, including the development of processes and procedures.ResultsKnowledge and resources have been shared and future collaborations identified, including events to encourage new topics from patients and the public. The HTW PPI lead has become a member of key PPI groups, locally and internationally. HTW has recruited public partners who are actively contributing as full members of the Assessment Group and the Appraisal Panel; two members on each Committee. The PPI Standing Group has been established. They have provided advice and co-produced PPI tools for piloting.ConclusionsThe PPI Standing Group concluded that PPI methods and approaches should be tailored for each project based on best practice, and should be piloted to allow them to evolve based on impact evaluation. A PPI strategy or framework would be more useful at a later stage. HTW is committed to identifying and following best practice. Future-proofing and building smart capability will be key to ensuring that HTW develops effective PPI that can be dynamic and responsive to the evolving PPI and HTA landscapes.

OP110 Survey Of Health Technology Assessment Evaluation Strategies For Patient And Public Involvement

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 51-52
Author(s):  
Laura Weeks ◽  
Julie Polisena ◽  
Anna Scott ◽  
Anke-Peggy Holtorf ◽  
Sophie Staniszewska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Participant Satisfaction ◽  
The Public ◽  
Evaluation Strategies ◽  
And Training ◽  
Process Evaluations

INTRODUCTION:Although there is increased awareness of patient and public involvement (PPI) among Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organizations, evaluations of PPI initiatives are relatively scarce. Our objective as members of HTAi's Patient and Citizen Involvement Group (PCIG) was to advance understanding of the range of evaluation strategies adopted by HTA organizations and their potential usefulness.METHODS:In March 2016, a survey was sent to HTA organizations through the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) and contacts of members of HTAi's PCIG. Respondents were asked about their organizational structure; how patients and members of the public are involved; whether and how PPI initiatives have been evaluated, and, if so, which facilitators and challenges to evaluation were found and how results were used and disseminated.RESULTS:Fifteen programs from twelve countries responded that involved patient (14/15) and members of the public (10/15) in HTA activities. Seven programs evaluated their PPI activities, including participant satisfaction (5/7), process evaluations (5/7) and impact evaluations (4/7). Evaluation results were used to improve PPI activities, identify education and training needs, and direct strategic priorities. Facilitators and challenges revolved around the need for stakeholder buy-in, sufficient resources, senior leadership, and including patients in evaluations. Participants also provided suggestions based on their experiences for others embarking on this work, for example including patients and members of the public in the process.CONCLUSIONS:We identified a small but diverse set of HTA organizations internationally that are evaluating their PPI activities. Our results add to the limited literature by documenting a range of evaluation strategies that reflect the range of rationales and approaches to PPI in HTA. It will be important for HTA organizations to draw on formal evaluation theories and methods when planning future evaluations, and to also share their approaches and experiences with evaluation.

scholarly journals Role of patients’ organizations in Health Technology Assessment: a Habermasian system and lifeworld perspective

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Neda Milevska-Kostova ◽  
Sita Ratna Devi Duddi ◽  
Richard J. Cooper
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Communicative Action ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Social Theories ◽  
Policy Communities

Abstract Patient and public involvement in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is gaining increased interest among research and policy communities. Patients’ organizations represent an important link between individual patients and the health system. Social theories are increasingly being used to explain doctor–patient–system interactions, expanding understanding beyond the mere clinical perspective. In this sense, patient involvement in HTA can also be considered through the Habermas’s theory of communicative action. From a Habermasian perspective, HTA as part of the instrumental rationality contributes to an increased efficiency of resource use within the system; however, such rationalization threatens to colonize the lifeworld by making it “increasingly state administered with attenuated possibilities for communicative action as a result of the commercialization and rationalization in terms of immediate returns.” Using Habermasian system/lifeworld framework, this paper explores opportunities and obstacles to patient involvement in HTA, whereby trying to understand current and possible roles of patients’ organizations as a mediating force between HTA as a function of the system and the lifeworld represented by patients.

The representation of public values in health technology assessment to inform funding decisions: the case of Australia's national funding bodies

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hossein Haji Ali Afzali ◽  
Jackie Street ◽  
Tracy Merlin ◽  
Jonathan Karnon
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Technol Assess Health ◽  
Public Inputs ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Abstract Over the past few years, there has been an increasing recognition of the value of public involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) to ensure the legitimacy and fairness of public funding decisions [Street J, Stafinski T, Lopes E, Menon D. Defining the role of the public in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and HTA-informed decision-making processes. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020;36:87–95]. However, important challenges remain, in particular, how to reorient HTA to reflect public priorities. In a recent international survey of thirty HTA agencies conducted by the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA), public engagement in HTA was listed as one of the “Top 10” challenges for HTA agencies [O'Rourke B, Werko SS, Merlin T, Huang LY, Schuller T. The “Top 10” challenges for health technology assessment: INAHTA viewpoint. Int J Technol Assess. 2020;36:1–4]. Historically, Australia has been at the forefront of the application of HTA for assessing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of new health technologies to inform public funding decisions. However, current HTA processes in Australia lack meaningful public inputs. Using Australia as an example, we describe this important limitation and discuss the potential impact of this gap on the health system and future directions.

scholarly journals Innovative Patient Involvement During Covid-19: Keeping Patients at the Heart of HTA

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Rasburn ◽  
Helen Crosbie ◽  
Amanda Tonkinson ◽  
David Chandler ◽  
Tasneem Dhanji ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
Potential Barriers ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Patient Representatives ◽  
Virtual Setting ◽  
Patient Concerns ◽  
Rapid Shift

The COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown measures in the United Kingdom resulted in significant challenges and created opportunities for innovation to keep patients at the heart of HTA. The introduction of the Coronavirus Act 2020 and the associated public health guidance meant that NICE's conventional HTA methods were no longer feasible. NICE introduced rapid, innovative updates to patient and public involvement (PPI), decision-making meetings, and consultations to harness the expertise of patients and the public to ensure guidance addressed the expected concerns and identified barriers which could impact access. This article describes the PPI support for NICE's rapid shift to virtual meetings and virtual engagement. We utilize the authors' experience and patient and public contributor feedback to understand the experience of participating in a virtual setting and identify four themes: accessibility; inclusivity; transparency; and intrapersonal relationships and committee dynamics. The article also considers how patient representatives participated in, and facilitated, the development of guidance for a hypothetical technology to keep patients and the public at the heart of expedited and novel HTA processes to identify and understand the expected patient concerns and potential barriers for when a technology would be introduced.

scholarly journals Public and patient involvement in research on ageing and dementia

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 259-264
Author(s):  
Julian Ashton ◽  
Clare F. Aldus ◽  
Peter Richmond ◽  
Helen Allen
Keyword(s):  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Social Implications ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Public ◽  
Leading Role ◽  
Current State ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Public And Patient Involvement

Purpose This paper aims to assess the current state, and various methods, of public and patient involvement, particularly but not exclusively in research on ageing and dementia. Design/methodology/approach Interviews were carried out with a researcher, who has had a leading role in research on dementia; a public contributor with extensive relevant experience; and a member of the research design service with responsibility for patient and public involvement. Findings All those involved in the research can benefit considerably from public and patient involvement and it can make a significant difference to the course of a project. The importance of choosing an appropriate method of involvement is discussed and planning for it in both financial terms and time allowed. Examples are given of successful studies. Research limitations/implications Those who took part in the interviews were chosen for their record in furthering public and patient involvement in research. There is no attempt to compare their views with those of the wider research community. Practical implications The various ways in which patients and the public are involved in relevant research is a guide to those designing projects and those who may want to explore opportunities for involvement. Social implications Social implications include being able to influence research projects, contributors of all ages find they are valued. Originality/value The format of the paper is original, eliciting material from three viewpoints on research and involvement.

A framework for action to improve patient and public involvement in health technology assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Aline Silveira Silva ◽  
Karen Facey ◽  
Stirling Bryan ◽  
Dayani Galato
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Communication Capacity ◽  
Three Phase

Abstract Background Patient and public involvement (PPI) in the Brazilian Health Technology Assessment (HTA) process occurs in response to a legislative mandate for “social participation.” This resulted in some limited patient participation activities, and, therefore, a more systematic approach was needed. The study describes the development of a suggested framework for action to improve PPI in HTA. Methods This work used formal methodology to develop a PPI framework based on three-phase mixed-methods research with desktop review of Brazilian PPI activities in HTA; workshop, survey, and interviews with Brazilian stakeholders; and a rapid review of international practices to enact effective patient involvement. Patient partners reviewed the draft framework. Results According to patient group representatives, their involvement in the Brazilian HTA process is important but could be improved. Different stakeholders perceived barriers, identified values, and made suggestions for improvement, such as expansion of communication, capacity building, and transparency, to support more meaningful patient involvement. The international practices identified opportunities for earlier, more active, and collaborative PPI during all HTA stages, based on values and principles that are relevant for Brazilian patients and the public. These findings were synthesized to design a framework that defines and systematizes actions to support PPI in Brazil, highlighting the importance of evaluating these strategies. Conclusions Since the publication of this framework, some of its suggestions are being implemented in the Brazilian HTA process to improve PPI. We encourage other HTA organizations to consider a systematic and planned approach with regular evaluation when pursuing or strengthening involvement practices.

scholarly journals PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT IN EARLY AWARENESS AND ALERT ACTIVITIES: AN EXAMPLE FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Simpson ◽  
Alison Cook ◽  
Kathryn Miles
Keyword(s):  
United Kingdom ◽  
Web Site ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Early Assessment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
The United Kingdom ◽  
Horizon Scanning ◽  
System Input

Objectives: The aim of this study is to report on the experiences, benefits, and challenges of patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) from a publicly funded early awareness and alert (EAA) system in the United Kingdom.Methods: Using email, telephone, a Web site portal, Twitter and focus groups, patients and the public were involved and engaged in the recognized stages of an EAA system: identification, filtration, prioritization, early assessment, and dissemination.Results: Approaches for PPIE were successfully integrated into all aspects of the National Institute for Health Research Horizon Scanning Research and Intelligence Centre's EAA system. Input into identification activities was not as beneficial as involvement in prioritization and early assessment. Patients gave useful insight into the Centre's Web site and engaging patients using Twitter has enabled the Centre to disseminate outputs to a wider audience.Conclusions: EAA systems should consider involving and engaging with patients and the public in identification, prioritization, and assessment of emerging health technologies where practicable. Further research is required to examine the value and impact of PPIE in EAA activities and in the early development of health technologies.

scholarly journals Defining the role of the public in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and HTA-informed decision-making processes

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. 87-95
Author(s):  
Jackie Street ◽  
Tania Stafinski ◽  
Edilene Lopes ◽  
Devidas Menon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Operational Definition ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
The Public ◽  
The World

ObjectivesThe terminology used to describe community participation in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is contested and frequently confusing. The terms patients, consumers, public, lay members, customers, users, citizens, and others have been variously used, sometimes interchangeably. Clarity in the use of terms and goals for including the different groups is needed to mitigate existing inconsistencies in the application of patient and public involvement (PPI) across HTA processes around the world.MethodsWe drew from a range of literature sources in order to conceptualize (i) an operational definition for the “public” and other stakeholders in the context of HTA and (ii) possible goals for their involvement. Draft definitions were tested and refined in an iterative consensus-building process with stakeholders from around the world.ResultsThe goals, terminology, interests, and roles for PPI in HTA processes were clarified. The research provides rationales for why the role of the public should be distinguished from that of patients, their families, and caregivers. A definition for the public in the context of HTA was developed: A community member who holds the public interest and has no commercial, personal, or professional interest in the HTA processConclusionsThere are two distinct aspects to the interests held by the public which should be explicitly included in the HTA process: the first lies in ensuring democratic accountability and the second in recognising the importance of including public values in decision making.

scholarly journals EVALUATION OF PATIENT AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT INITIATIVES IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: A SURVEY OF INTERNATIONAL AGENCIES

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 715-723 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Weeks ◽  
Julie Polisena ◽  
Anna Mae Scott ◽  
Anke-Peggy Holtorf ◽  
Sophie Staniszewska ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Participant Satisfaction ◽  
The Public ◽  
International Agencies ◽  
Evaluation Strategies ◽  
And Training

Objectives: Although there is increased awareness of patient and public involvement (PPI) among health technology assessment (HTA) organizations, evaluations of PPI initiatives are relatively scarce. Our objective as members of Health Technology Assessment International's (HTAi's) Patient and Citizen Involvement Group (PCIG) was to advance understanding of the range of evaluation strategies adopted by HTA organizations and their potential usefulness.Methods: In March 2016, a survey was sent to fifty-four HTA organizations through the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) and contacts of members of HTAi's PCIG. Respondents were asked about their organizational structure; how patients and members of the public are involved; whether and how PPI initiatives have been evaluated, and, if so, which facilitators and challenges to evaluation were found and how results were used and disseminated.Results: Fifteen (n = 15) programs from twelve countries responded (response rate 27.8 percent) that involved patients (14/15) and members of the public (10/15) in HTA activities. Seven programs evaluated their PPI activities, including participant satisfaction (5/7), process (5/7) and impact evaluations (4/7). Evaluation results were used to improve PPI activities, identify education and training needs, and direct strategic priorities. Facilitators and challenges revolved around the need for stakeholder buy-in, sufficient resources, senior leadership, and including patients in evaluations.Conclusions: A small but diverse set of HTA organizations evaluate their PPI activities using a range of strategies that reflect the range of rationales and approaches to PPI in HTA. It will be important for HTA organizations to draw on evaluation theories and methods.

OP35 Involving Members Of The Public In A National Screening Programme Health Technology Assessment

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 16-16
Author(s):  
Emma Cockcroft ◽  
Linda Long ◽  
Christopher Hyde ◽  
Kristin Liabo
Keyword(s):  
Lung Cancer ◽  
Cancer Screening ◽  
Public Involvement ◽  
Resource Constraints ◽  
Lung Cancer Screening ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Patient And Public Involvement ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Meetings

INTRODUCTION:Involving members of the public in the development of Health Technology Assessments (HTAs) has scientific and public value (1) but the most common form of involvement in HTA remains collection of people's views in the form of data (2). Involving members of the public in shaping the research is rare due to perceived time or resource constraints (3). Our research aimed to; (i) develop tailored meeting formats for public involvement in a lung cancer screening HTA, (ii) capture views on lung cancer screening using a community drop in format (iii) explore how different groups of public contributors, with various prior experience of involvement, participated in the HTA consultation process.METHODS:The involvement included three separate public meetings and a drop-in session at a community centre. Meeting formats were specifically tailored to meet the needs of the lung cancer screening HTA while drawing on previous patient and public involvement (PPI) work in relevant disciplines. All meetings were audio recorded and observed using a structured form. This data is currently being analysed using a combination of inductive and thematic analysis.RESULTS:The qualitative research data on PPI processes was collected in November 2016. The paper will present results from our full analysis. At present, we note that while limited time was available to explain HTA to participants, this did not hamper the discussions’ relevance to the HTA work. Participants shared personal stories irrespective of whether they knew each other from before. People drew on own and others’ experiences when discussing outcomes of importance to this HTA.CONCLUSIONS:Prior involvement in research or specific research methods training may not be necessary for public involvement in HTA. This has implications for involving diverse or “hard to reach” groups, without high levels of associated cost.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document