PP184 Twenty Years of Health Technology Assessments on Robotic Assisted Surgery: A Summary

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (S1) ◽  
pp. 25-25
Author(s):  
Ben Forrest ◽  
Nikhil Sahai ◽  
Chao Song
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Da Vinci ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Surgical Indication ◽  
Annual Number ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
Robotic Assisted Surgery ◽  
Nose And Throat

IntroductionDa Vinci robotic-assisted surgery (RAS) has been evaluated by health technology assessment (HTA) organizations across the world. This study aimed to analyze the existing HTA reports over years, countries, and procedures.MethodsPublicly available health technology appraisal reports on RAS published from January 2000 to November 2020 were identified via a targeted literature search. The literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination database, the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment database, and Google scholar. Reports related to the da Vinci RAS were included. Full texts of reports were used for the analysis.For the HTAs that recommended RAS, the directional conclusion was considered as positive. For HTA reports that discouraged the use of RAS, the directional conclusion was considered as negative. The rest were considered as neutral. The reports were analyzed by year, country, and procedure.ResultsWe identified 65 HTA reports comprising 128 procedure-level assessments of RAS by 42 HTA organizations in 21 countries over 20 years. The annual number of assessments increased over time. The countries that completed the most assessments were Sweden (14 reports, including 15 procedure-level assessments: 13% positive and 80% neutral) and Canada (11 reports, including 20 procedure-level assessments: 65% positive).The topics of the assessments covered 27 surgical indications in urology, gynecology, thoracic, general, and ear, nose, and throat. The conclusions of the HTAs varied by surgical indication. Prostatectomy (33 reports: 85% neutral or positive) was the most widely assessed surgical indication, followed by hysterectomy (16 reports: 81% neutral or positive), nephrectomy (15 reports: 73% neutral or positive), and rectal resection (10 reports: 100% neutral or positive).ConclusionsThe number and breadth of HTAs on RAS have grown at an increasing rate over the last 20 years. The directional conclusion of assessments varied by procedure and country. Further analysis is warranted to understand the factors contributing to HTA conclusions on RAS.

scholarly journals Development of a checklist to guide equity considerations in health technology assessment

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Benkhalti ◽  
Manuel Espinoza ◽  
Richard Cookson ◽  
Vivian Welch ◽  
Peter Tugwell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Translation ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Health Inequities ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Pilot Test

Abstract Objectives Health technology assessment (HTA) can impact health inequities by informing healthcare priority-setting decisions. This paper presents a novel checklist to guide HTA practitioners looking to include equity considerations in their work: the equity checklist for HTA (ECHTA). The list is pragmatically organized according to the generic HTA phases and can be consulted at each step. Methods A first set of items was based on the framework for equity in HTA developed by Culyer and Bombard. After rewording and reorganizing according to five HTA phases, they were complemented by elements emerging from a literature search. Consultations with method experts, decision makers, and stakeholders further refined the items. Further feedback was sought during a presentation of the tool at an international HTA conference. Lastly, the checklist was piloted through all five stages of an HTA. Results ECHTA proposes elements to be considered at each one of the five HTA phases: Scoping, Evaluation, Recommendations and Conclusions, Knowledge Translation and Implementation, and Reassessment. More than a simple checklist, the tool provides details and examples that guide the evaluators through an analysis in each phase. A pilot test is also presented, which demonstrates the ECHTA's usability and added value. Conclusions ECHTA provides guidance for HTA evaluators wishing to ensure that their conclusions do not contribute to inequalities in health. Several points to build upon the current checklist will be addressed by a working group of experts, and further feedback is welcome from evaluators who have used the tool.

PP142 A Mental Health Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment In Quebec, Canada: Structure And Products

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 137-138
Author(s):  
Ionela Gheorghiu ◽  
Alain Lesage ◽  
Adam Mongodin ◽  
Marlène Galdin
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Social Services ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Decision Making Process

INTRODUCTION:Our Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment unit (HB-HTA) was founded in 2011 following the nomination of Louis-H. Lafontaine hospital as the Montreal University Mental Health Institute (IUSMM). From the beginning, the HB-HTA has been supporting and advising the Chief Executive Officer of IUSMM in the decision-making process concerning the implementation of new technologies and practices in mental health. Since 2015, the HB-HTA is part of the East of Montreal Regional Integrated Health and Social Services Centre (CIUSSS de l'Est-de-l’Île de Montréal), continuing to support decisions in mental health. Currently, the HB-HTA unit is nested in the Quality, Performance and Ethics department.METHODS:Formed by a coordinator, a scientific advisor and a manager, the HB-HTA team plans, organizes and sets up the evaluation activities. The unit benefits from the support of a Steering Committee which consists of representatives of clinical, administrative and research directions, as well as of health users and families. This committee determine the strategic orientation of the HB-HTA unit, prioritize the projects, approves the evaluation products and gives indications on the knowledge transfer process.RESULTS:To answer the decision questions, our HB-HTA unit employs two types of products: evaluation reports and informative notes. Based on an exhaustive literature search and consultations with stakeholders, the evaluation reports offer recommendations to support the decision-making process. The informative notes are rapid responses based on a partial literature search. The nature of this type of analysis does not allow the formulation of recommendations, however, a conclusion of the consulted literature is offered.CONCLUSIONS:Based on the work of our HB-HTA unit, some important decisions were made by the IUSMM. As an example, the systematic screening of psychiatric patients for drug and alcohol was not favored by our institution; rather than this, priority was given to staff training, in order to better identify and treat psychiatric patients with substance abuse comorbidity.

OP101 Do We Need To Extend Health Technology Assessment To Health Enhancement Assessment?

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 46-46
Author(s):  
Bjørn Hofmann
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Cognitive Abilities ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Health And Wellbeing ◽  
Wide Range

INTRODUCTION:Several health technologies used for therapy can also be used for health enhancement. Drugs stimulating cognitive abilities are but one example. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) has not been developed for assessing enhancements. This raises the question of how HTA should address the blurred distinction between therapy and enhancement. Should we (i) carve out a distinction between therapy and enhancement and limit HTA to therapy, (ii) use HTA for both therapy and enhancement (with some modifications), or (iii) should we develop a separate health enhancement assessment (HEA)?METHODS:A literature search of the medical, philosophical, and bioethical literature was conducted for debates, arguments, and suggested solutions to the issue of therapy versus enhancement.RESULTS:The same improvement in health may be therapeutic in one patient, but an enhancement in another. Moreover, both therapy and enhancement share the same goal: increased health and wellbeing. A wide range of arguments try to establish a difference between therapy and enhancement. They refer to naturalness, rehabilitation, normality, species-typical functioning/potential, disease, sustainability, and responsibility. On closer scrutiny few of these arguments do the job in bolstering the therapy-enhancement distinction. We already use a wide range of means to extend human abilities. Moreover, the therapy-enhancement distinction raises a wide range of ethical issues that are relevant for the assessment of a number of emerging health technologies.CONCLUSIONS:Existing HTA methodology can address a wide range of non-therapeutic health enhancements. However, a series of broader issues related to the goal of health care and responsibility for altering human evolution may not be addressed within traditional HTA frameworks. Specific HEAs may therefore be helpful.

scholarly journals Comparative health technology assessment of robotic-assisted, direct manual laparoscopic and open surgery: a prospective study

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 543-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Turchetti ◽  
Francesca Pierotti ◽  
Ilaria Palla ◽  
Stefania Manetti ◽  
Cinzia Freschi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prospective Study ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Open Surgery ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Robotic Assisted ◽  
A Prospective Study

DRUG DISINVESTMENT FRAMEWORKS: COMPONENTS, CHALLENGES, AND SOLUTIONS

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 261-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Alison Maloney ◽  
Lisa Schwartz ◽  
Daria O'Reilly ◽  
Mitchel Levine
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Web Sites ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Value Assessment

Objectives:Value assessments of marketed drug technologies have been developed through disinvestment frameworks. Components of these frameworks are varied and implementation challenges are prevalent. The objective of this systematic literature review was to describe disinvestment framework process components for drugs and to report on framework components, challenges, and solutions.Methods:A systematic literature search was conducted using the terms: reassessment, reallocation, reinvestment, disinvestment, delist, decommission or obsolescence in MEDLINE, EMBASE, NLM PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL from January 1, 2000, until November 14, 2015. Additional citations were identified through a gray literature search of Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi) and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) member Web sites and from bibliographies of full-text reviewed manuscripts.Results:Sixty-three articles underwent full text review and forty were included in the qualitative analysis. Framework components including disinvestment terms and definitions, identification and prioritization criteria and methods, assessment processes, stakeholders and dissemination strategies, challenges, and solutions were compiled. This review finds that stakeholders lack the political, administrative, and clinical will to support disinvestment and that there is not one disinvestment framework that is considered best practice.Conclusions:Drug technology disinvestment components and processes vary and challenges are numerous. Future research should focus on lessening value assessment challenges. This could include adopting more neutral framework terminology, setting fixed reassessment timelines, conducting therapeutic reviews, and modifying current qualitative decision-making assessment frameworks.

IMPACT OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN LITIGATION CONCERNING ACCESS TO HIGH-COST DRUGS

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-414 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia Aleman ◽  
Ana Perez Galan
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Latin American ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Literature Search ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
The Right ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Latin American Countries ◽  
Comprehensive Literature Search

Objectives: The impact of health technology assessment (HTA) in the judicialization of the right of health has not been deeply studied in Latin American countries. The purpose of this study is to review the process of judicialization of the access to high cost drugs in Uruguay and assess the impact HTAs have had on this process.Methods: The methodology used for this study included a comprehensive literature search in electronic databases, local journals, internal documents developed in the Ministry of Health, as well as conducting interviews with key informants.Results: Judicialization of the access of high cost drugs has been increasing since 2010. The strategy of the Ministry of Health of Uruguay to decrease this problem included the organization of roundtables with judges and other stakeholders on the basis of HTA, the training of defense lawyers in the use and interpretation of HTA, and the participation of a professional who develops HTA in the preparation of the defense arguments. A year after the implementation of this strategy, 25 percent of writs of protection were won by the Ministry of Health.Conclusions: Even though the strategy implemented was effective in reducing the loss of litigations, it was not effective in reducing the growing number of writs of protection. It is essential to address this problem in a broad debate and to promote understanding between the parties.

Versorgungsforschung in der Klinischen Neuropsychologie – eine Standortbestimmung

2008 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabine Heel ◽  
Sonja Fischer ◽  
Stefan Fischer ◽  
Tobias Grässer ◽  
Ellen Hämmerling ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Empirische Forschung

Zunächst führt dieser Artikel in die wesentlichen Begrifflichkeiten und Zielstellungen der Versorgungsforschung ein. Er befasst sich dann mit der Frage, wie die einzelnen Teildisziplinen der Versorgungsforschung, (1) die Bedarfsforschung, (2) die Inanspruchnahmeforschung, (3) die Organisationsforschung, (4) das Health Technology Assessment, (5) die Versorgungsökonomie, (6) die Qualitätsforschung und zuletzt (7) die Versorgungsepidemiologie konzeptionell zu fassen sind, und wie sie für neuropsychologische Anliegen ausformuliert werden müssen. In diesem Zusammenhang werden die in den einzelnen Bereichen jeweils vorliegenden versorgungsrelevanten Studienergebnisse referiert. Soweit es zulässig ist, werden Bedarfe für die Versorgungsforschung und Versorgungspraxis in der Neurorehabilitation daraus abgeleitet und Anregungen für die weitere empirische Forschung formuliert. Der Artikel bezieht sich – entsprechend seines Anliegens – ausschließlich auf Studien, die sich mit der Situation der deutschen Neurorehabilitation befassen.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document