scholarly journals Economic evaluations of health technologies in Dutch healthcare decision-making: a qualitative study of the current and potential use, barriers, and facilitators

2017 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kitty J. Roseboom ◽  
Johanna M. van Dongen ◽  
Emile Tompa ◽  
Maurits W. van Tulder ◽  
Judith E. Bosmans
2011 ◽  
Vol 85 (3) ◽  
pp. e291-e298 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vikki Ann Entwistle ◽  
Emma F. France ◽  
Sally Wyke ◽  
Ruth Jepson ◽  
Kate Hunt ◽  
...  

1999 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-98 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Clouse ◽  
Jean Paul Gagnon ◽  
Greg Boyer ◽  
Diana Brixner ◽  
Carolyn Clancy ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 16-17
Author(s):  
Enver Kagan Atikeler ◽  
Ahmad Nader Fasseeh ◽  
Bert Leufkens ◽  
Wim Goettsch

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.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. e0212967 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Nicholas Dionne-Odom ◽  
Deborah Ejem ◽  
Rachel Wells ◽  
Amber E. Barnato ◽  
Richard A. Taylor ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Paul Hansen ◽  
Nancy Devlin

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) is increasingly used to support healthcare decision-making. MCDA involves decision makers evaluating the alternatives under consideration based on the explicit weighting of criteria relevant to the overarching decision—in order to, depending on the application, rank (or prioritize) or choose between the alternatives. A prominent example of MCDA applied to healthcare decision-making that has received a lot of attention in recent years and is the main subject of this article is choosing which health “technologies” (i.e., drugs, devices, procedures, etc.) to fund—a process known as health technology assessment (HTA). Other applications include prioritizing patients for surgery, prioritizing diseases for R&D, and decision-making about licensing treatments. Most applications are based on weighted-sum models. Such models involve explicitly weighting the criteria and rating the alternatives on the criteria, with each alternative’s “performance” on the criteria aggregated using a linear (i.e., additive) equation to produce the alternative’s “total score,” by which the alternatives are ranked. The steps involved in a MCDA process are explained, including an overview of methods for scoring alternatives on the criteria and weighting the criteria. The steps are: structuring the decision problem being addressed, specifying criteria, measuring alternatives’ performance, scoring alternatives on the criteria and weighting the criteria, applying the scores and weights to rank the alternatives, and presenting the MCDA results, including sensitivity analysis, to decision makers to support their decision-making. Arguments recently advanced against using MCDA for HTA and counterarguments are also considered. Finally, five questions associated with how MCDA for HTA is operationalized are discussed: Whose preferences are relevant for MCDA? Should criteria and weights be decision-specific or identical for repeated applications? How should cost or cost-effectiveness be included in MCDA? How can the opportunity cost of decisions be captured in MCDA? How can uncertainty be incorporated into MCDA?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document