scholarly journals Developing a roadmap for Health Technology Assessment implementation in public health decisions

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
F Di Macio ◽  
M Caricato ◽  
C Primieri ◽  
C Favaretti ◽  
C De Waure
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Delphi Process ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
High Quality ◽  
Health Decisions

Abstract Issue Although the recognized importance of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) in fostering health policy and management, little is known and differences emerge in the state of the art of HTA development and use in public health decisions. Description of the Problem HTA applied to public health interventions could lead to improved population's health, risk factor reduction and high quality services. All these factors represent the basis of health care system sustainability. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence about the application of HTA to public health. In this light, the Section on HTA of the European Public Health Association (EUPHA) is conducting a Delphi process in order to define a shared roadmap for the implementation of HTA in public health. Results A literature search was first performed on PubMed to identify useful documentation for drafting the roadmap. Taking clues from Kalò et al., who drafted an HTA roadmap scorecard to support HTA implementation in Central and Eastern Europe, a preliminary core set of actions and pillars to pave the way for the implementation of HTA in public health, was identified. Then, a group of HTA experts was invited to participate to the Delphi process with the aim to build consensus on the final set of actions and pillars to include in the roadmap. Lessons Evidence on the ways to strengthen the role of HTA in public health decisions is scant and the development of a shared roadmap could be useful to identify milestones to do it. Key messages HTA applied to public health could promote an efficient, sustainable, equitable and high-quality health system. Nevertheless, the role of HTA in taking public health decisions should be strengthened. As evidence on the application of HTA in public health is scant, the development of a shared roadmap could enhance fostering its use in taking decisions on public health interventions.

scholarly journals Evaluating Public Health Interventions: A Neglected Area in Health Technology Assessment

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jovana Stojanovic ◽  
Markus Wübbeler ◽  
Sebastian Geis ◽  
Eva Reviriego ◽  
Iñaki Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENTIONS: A SYNTHESIS OF METHODOLOGICAL GUIDANCE

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Mathes ◽  
Sunya-Lee Antoine ◽  
Peggy Prengel ◽  
Stefanie Bühn ◽  
Stephanie Polus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Context Factors

Objectives: The evaluation of public health interventions poses some challenges. As a consequence, health technology assessment (HTA) methods for public health interventions (PHI) have to be adapted. This study aimed to summarize the available guidance on methods for HTA of PHI.Methods: We systematically searched for methodological guidance on HTA of PHIs. Our focus was on research synthesis methods to evaluate effectiveness. Relevant information was synthesized narratively in a standardized way.Results: Only four guidance documents were identified specifically for HTAs of PHI. The approaches used for HTAs of PHIs are broader and more flexible than those for medical interventions. For this reason, there is a tendency to identify the intervention components and context factors that influence the effectiveness and transferability of an intervention rather than to assess its effectiveness in general. The details in the guidance vary without justification. Unjustified heterogeneity between the different guidance approaches is most pronounced for quality assessment, assessment of applicability, and methods to integrate qualitative and quantitative evidence. Descriptions for the assessment of integrity, heterogeneity, sustainability, context factors, and applicability are often vague.Conclusions: The heterogeneity in approaches indicates that there is currently no consensus on methods to deal with the challenges of the PHI evaluations. A possible explanation for this may be that the methods are not sufficiently developed, and advantages and disadvantages of a certain method in relation to the research question (e.g., broad/focused) have not yet been sufficiently evaluated.

INTRODUCTION: HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT AND THE EUROPEAN UNION

2000 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Banta ◽  
Wija Oortwijn
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
European Union ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
European Commission ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Level

Health technology assessment (HTA) has become increasingly important in the European Union as an aid to decision making. As agencies and programs have been established, there is increasing attention to coordination of HTA at the European level, especially considering the growing role of the European Union in public health in Europe. This series of papers describes and analyzes the situation with regard to HTA in the 15 members of the European Union, plus Switzerland. The final paper draws some conclusions, especially concerning the future involvement of the European Commission in HTA.

scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for HTA Around the Globe: Exploring the Next Frontiers of HTA and Best Practices Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Unni Gopinathan ◽  
Trygve Ottersen ◽  
Pascale-Renée Cyr ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Justification ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Key Steps ◽  
Deliberative Processes

This comment reflects on an article by Oortwijn, Jansen, and Baltussen about the use and features of ‘evidence-informed deliberative processes’ (EDPs) among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world and the need for more guidance. First, we highlight procedural aspects that are relevant across key steps of EDP, focusing on conflict of interest, the different roles of stakeholders throughout a HTA and public justification of decisions. Second, we discuss new knowledge and models needed to maximize the value of deliberative processes at the expanding frontiers of HTA, paying special attention to when HTA is applied in primary care, employed for public health interventions, and is produced through international collaboration.

Health technology assessment

2020 ◽  
pp. 464-475
Author(s):  
Chiara de Waure ◽  
Carlo Favaretti
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Healthcare Services ◽  
Health Practitioner ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Domains ◽  
Process Gain

The aim of this chapter is to help the public health practitioner to: learn what health technology assessment (HTA) is in healthcare and in public health domains; understand that HTA is a powerful tool for the governance of the healthcare systems at all their levels: macro (national and regional), meso (hospitals and healthcare services organizations), and micro (healthcare professionals); understand that HTA is a multidisciplinary, multidimensional and multistakeholder process; gain knowledge about how to develop an HTA report to support decision makers in taking the best possible decisions; know the main sources of data to base the assessment contents on evidence; recognize the role of HTA in public health

scholarly journals VOLUME 30: PUBLIC HEALTH INTERVENTIONS AND NUTRITION AS A PREVENTATIVE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY

2014 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-344
Author(s):  
Irene Lenoir-Wijnkoop
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
The Past ◽  
Preventative Health ◽  
The Subject

In the wake of the UN Summit on non-communicable diseases (NCDs) (1), the subject has become a priority on most health agendas and scientific publications in this area have increased considerably over the past few years. NCDs are a threat, both for the sustainability of public health structures and for the wellbeing of the general population worldwide. Many risk factors have been identified as preventable and the determining role of lifestyle habits, such as physical exercise and food, in the pathogenesis of NCDs is now generally acknowledged.

OP75 Facts And Values In Health Technology Assessment: The Case Of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (S1) ◽  
pp. 19-19
Author(s):  
Bart Bloemen ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Wouter Rijke ◽  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Gert Vanderwilt
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Prenatal Testing ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Non Invasive ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Healthcare Technologies ◽  
General Abstract ◽  
Structured Questionnaire

IntroductionHealth Technology Assessment (HTA) is where facts and values meet: the evidence that is considered relevant to the assessment of a technology depends on the value framework used. In the context of the European project VALIDATE (Values in doing assessments of healthcare technologies), we assessed to what extent this interplay between facts and values is acknowledged in HTA reports on non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT). Our aim is to gain a better understanding of this fact-value relationship, and to contribute to the development of capacity for ethical analyses in HTA.MethodsFive reviewers independently analyzed HTA reports on NIPT, obtained from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) HTA database, by answering a structured questionnaire on: (i) arguments, values, and conclusions; (ii) relations between values and collected evidence; (iii) operationalizations of the values involved. Ethical argumentation was analyzed using the method of specifying norms. This method holds that for general, abstract ethical principles to reach concrete cases, principles need to be specified in such a way as to achieve maximal coherence between different value commitments and practice. The results of the analysis were discussed in joint meetings to arrive at a consensus on interpretation.ResultsOur results show that the pivotal role of values in defining what counts as relevant evidence and why, is rarely acknowledged. The same holds for the importance of specifying values as a means to achieve greater coherence between the use of healthcare technologies and a range of values.ConclusionsThere is ample room for improvement in clarifying the role of values in HTA: they can serve to explain and justify what evidence is considered relevant to the assessment of a healthcare technology. Recognizing that abstract values need specification in order to reach concrete cases opens up new opportunities for exploring in what way values are affected by healthcare technologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document