scholarly journals Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Appraisal Committee ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background: Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were recently introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes towards more legitimate decision-making. The EDP framework provides guidance that covers the HTA process, ie, contextual factors, installation of an appraisal committee, selecting health technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, and communication and appeal. The aims of this study were to identify the level of use of EDPs by HTA agencies, identify their needs for guidance, and to learn about best practices. Methods: A questionnaire for an online survey was developed based on the EDP framework, consisting of elements that reflect each part of the framework. The survey was sent to members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Two weeks following the invitation, a reminder was sent. The data collection took place between September-December 2018. Results: Contact persons from 27 member agencies filled out the survey (response rate: 54%), of which 25 completed all questions. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development and the critical elements regarding conducting and reporting on HTA are overall in place. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, appraisal, and communication and appeal. With regard to best practices, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) were most often mentioned. Conclusion: This is the first survey among HTA agencies regarding the use of EDPs and provides useful information for further developing a practical guide for HTA agencies around the globe. The results could support HTA agencies in improving their processes towards more legitimate decision-making, as they could serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation.

scholarly journals Application of evidence-informed deliberative processes in health technology assessment in low- and middle-income countries

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 440-444
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Sanne van Oosterhout ◽  
Lydia Kapiriri
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Contextual Factors ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Appraisal Committee ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Deliberative Processes ◽  
Low And Middle Income

ObjectivesEvidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes toward more legitimate decision making. A survey among members of the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA) showed that EDPs can also be relevant for countries that have not (yet) established such an agency. Therefore, we explored to what extent low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) applied the steps and elements stipulated in the EDP framework and their need for guidance.MethodsThe survey among INAHTA members was slightly adapted to address LMIC context and sent to 416 experts identified through several HTA sources. The questions focused on contextual factors and the EDP steps (installation of an appraisal committee, selecting technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, communication and appeal). Data collection took place between 21 May and 1 September 2019. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses were used to summarize the findings.ResultsWe received sixty-six meaningful responses from experts in thirty-two LMIC. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development are overall not present or only present to some extent. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, as well as communication and appeal.ConclusionsEDPs have the potential to provide steps for improving HTA processes. The results of this study can serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation of EDP application in the responding LMIC. This could support the countries in improving their processes and enhancing legitimate decision making when using HTA.

scholarly journals Resource allocation and health technology assessment in Australia: Views from the local level

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 134-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gisselle Gallego ◽  
Kees van Gool ◽  
Dianne Kelleher
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Service ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Local Level ◽  
Healthcare Providers ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Making Processes

Objectives:Several studies have shown that a key determinant of successful health technology assessment (HTA) uptake is a clear, fair, and consistent decision-making process for the approval and introduction of health technologies. The aim of this study was to gauge healthcare providers' and managers' perceptions of local level decision making and determine whether these processes offer a conducive environment for HTA. An Area Health Service (AHS) aimed to use the results of this study to help design a new process of technology assessment and decision making.Methods:An online survey was sent to all health service managers and healthcare providers working in one AHS in Sydney, Australia. Questions related to perceptions of current health technology decisions in participants' own institution/facility and opinions on key criteria for successful decision-making processes.Results:Less than a third of participants agreed with the statements that local decision-making processes were appropriate, easy to understand, evidence-based, fair, or consistently applied. Decisions were reportedly largely influenced by total cost considerations as well as by the central state health departments and the Area executive.Conclusions:Although there are renewed initiatives in HTA in Australia, there is a risk that such investments will not be productive unless policy makers also examine the decision-making contexts within which HTA can successfully be implemented. The results of this survey show that this is especially true at the local level and that any HTA initiative should be accompanied by efforts to improve decision-making processes.

scholarly journals Implementing evidence-informed deliberative processes in health technology assessment: a low income country perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lydia Kapiriri ◽  
Rob Baltussen ◽  
Wija Oortwijn
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Low Income ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Income Country ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Low Income Country ◽  
Deliberative Processes

AbstractThe purpose of this paper is to discuss the potential feasibility and utility of evidence-informed deliberative processes (EPDs) in low income country (LIC) contexts. EDPs are implemented in high and middle income countries and thought to improve the quality, consistency, and transparency of decisions informed by health technology assessment (HTA). Together these would ultimately improve the legitimacy of any decision making process. We argue—based on our previous work and in light of the priority setting literature—that EDPs are relevant and feasible within LICs. The extreme lack of resources necessitates making tough decisions which may mean depriving populations of potentially valuable health technologies. It is critical that the decisions and the decision making bodies are perceived as fair and legitimate by the people that are most affected by the decisions. EDPs are well aligned with the political infrastructure in some LICs, which encourages public participation in decision making. Furthermore, many countries are committed to evidence-informed decision making. However, the application of EDPs may be hampered by the limited availability of evidence of good quality, lack of interest in transparency and accountability (in some LICs), limited capacity to conduct HTA, as well as limited time and financial resources to invest in a deliberative process. While EDPs would potentially benefit many LICs, mitigating the identified potential barriers would strengthen their applicability. We believe that implementation studies in LICs, documenting the contextualized enablers and barriers will facilitate the development of context specific improvement strategies for EDPs.

scholarly journals The concept of multi-criteria analysis of decision-making in the current system of health technology assessment in Russia

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 3-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
V. V. Omelyanovsky ◽  
V. K. Fedyaeva ◽  
N. Z. Musina
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Decision Analysis ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Current System ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Methodology ◽  
Current Version ◽  
Health Technologies

In the article, we analyze the current version of Government Regulation No. 871 where the principles of health technologies assessment (HTA) and the reimbursement strategies in Russia have been put forward. We conclude that the HTA methodology in Russia is consistent with the multi-criteria decision analysis. Recommendations on the improvement of the assessment methodology in Regulation No. 871 are provided.

THE ROLE OF PATIENT DECISION-MAKING IN EVALUATING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESMENT (LITERATURE REVIEW)

Vestnik ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 315-323
Author(s):  
Л.К. Кошербаева ◽  
З.Р. Сагындыкова ◽  
Т.Б. Егеубаев
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Expert Knowledge ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Social Consequences ◽  
Patient Decision Making ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Giving Feedback

В условиях ограниченных бюджетов для современного здравоохранения рациональное потребление ресурсов является очень актуальной проблемой. Оценка технологий здравоохранения (ДСТБ) - комплексная оценка относительно доказанной клинической и клинико-экономической (фармаколого-экономической) эффективности и безопасности технологий здравоохранения, а также экономических, социальных и этических последствий их применения. Цель оценки технологий здравоохранения-одобрение заявленных технологий здравоохранения и включение заявленных технологий здравоохранения в перечень компенсации и информирование политиков в области здравоохранения. Следует ли применять здоровье сберегающую технологию, как ее применять и какую пользу от нее получают пациенты. Обучение экспертным знаниям о выживаемости, диагностике и лечении болезней и болезней, в том числе о методе оказания помощи (для анализа затрат и выгод), бремени болезней, выявлении пробелов в уходе, выявлении и удовлетворении потребностей. Предоставление отзывов о лечении (или отсутствии лечения и поддержки) социальных последствий заболевания способствует подходу пациентов, процессу принятия решений по мере необходимости. In the context of limited budgets for modern healthcare, rational resource consumption is a very urgent problem. Health Technology Assessment (OST) - a comprehensive assessment of the relatively proven clinical and clinical- economic (pharmacological-economic) effectiveness and safety of health technologies, as well as the economic, social and ethical consequences of their use. The purpose of the health technology assessment is to approve the claimed health technologies and include the claimed health technologies in the compensation list and inform health policy makers. It shows whether healthcare technology should be used or not, how it should be used, and how patients can benefit from it. Providing expert knowledge on the pain and burden of living, diagnosis and treatment, including the method of providing assistance (to analyze costs and benefits), the burden of diseases, identifying gaps in care, identifying and meeting needs. Giving feedback on the treatment (or lack of treatment and support) of the social consequences of the disease contributes to the decision-making process depending on the patient's attitude, needs.

scholarly journals DEVELOPMENT OF THE ONTARIO DECISION FRAMEWORK: A VALUES BASED FRAMEWORK FOR HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 290-299 ◽  
Author(s):  
Murray Krahn ◽  
Fiona Miller ◽  
Ahmed Bayoumi ◽  
Ann-Sylvia Brooker ◽  
Frank Wagner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Optimal Decision ◽  
Decision Framework ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Attributes

Objectives:In 2007, the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee (OHTAC) developed a decision framework to guide decision making around nondrug health technologies. In 2012, OHTAC commissioned a revision of this framework to enhance its usability and deepen its conceptual and theoretical foundations.Methods:The committee overseeing this work used several methods: (a) a priori consensus on guiding principles, (b) a scoping review of decision attributes and processes used globally in health technology assessment (HTA), (c) presentations by methods experts and members of review committees, and (d) committee deliberations over a period of 3 years.Results:The committee adopted a multi-criteria decision-making approach, but rejected the formal use of multi-criteria decision analysis. Three broad categories of attributes were identified: (I) context criteria attributes included factors such as stakeholders, adoption pressures from neighboring jurisdictions, and potential conflicts of interest; (II) primary appraisal criteria attributes included (i) benefits and harms, (ii) economics, and (iii) patient-centered care; (III) feasibility criteria attributes included budget impact and organizational feasibility.Conclusion:The revised Ontario Decision Framework is similar in some respects to frameworks used in HTA worldwide. Its distinctive characteristics are that: it is based on an explicit set of social values; HTA paradigms (evidence based medicine, economics, and bioethics/social science) are used to aggregate decision attributes; and that it is rooted in a theoretical framework of optimal decision making, rather than one related to broad social goals, such as health or welfare maximization.

scholarly journals Health technology assessment in Finland

2009 ◽  
Vol 25 (S1) ◽  
pp. 102-107 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjukka Mäkelä ◽  
Risto P. Roine
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Based Medicine ◽  
Special Responsibility ◽  
Made In

Since the 1990s, health policy makers in Finland have been supportive of evidence-based medicine and approaches to implement its results. The Finnish Office for Health Technology Assessment (Finohta) has grown from a small start in 1995 to a medium-sized health technology assessment (HTA) agency, with special responsibility in providing assessments to underpin national policies in screening. External evaluations enhanced the rapid growth. In the Finnish environment, decision making on health technologies is extremely decentralized, so Finohta has developed some practical tools for implementing HTA findings. The Managed Uptake of Medical Methods program links the hospital districts to agree on introduction of technologies. The Ohtanen database provides Finnish-language summaries of major assessments made in other countries.

scholarly journals 3.L. Workshop: It’s time for timeliness in Health Technology Assessment

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Critical Issue ◽  
Decision Making Process ◽  
Long Term Effects ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Increasing Demand ◽  
Set Up

Abstract The timeliness of the release of results is one of the most critical issue regarding Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and its potential to support decision-making. This matter may reflect the deep conflict between HTA doers and users. HTA is a form of evidence-based research, expected to timely inform decision-making at several levels - from health policy (macro) to hospital and clinical management (meso and micro) - ensuring accuracy and assessment of both short- and long-term effects of a health technology. HTA purpose therefore is to respond to real world needs, while not overlook a correct methodology. Fast developing health technologies have rapidly spread over the past decades, hence increasing demand for timely assessment aimed at their prompt implementation and management, especially at meso and micro decisional levels. Furthermore, the need for quick answers is emphasized by the pressures placed on policy-makers when a health technology is publicly promoted or contested. Furthermore, an ill-timed assessment can lead to several consequences, among which possible inequalities in access to healthcare. In order to address the challenge of timeliness, organizations involved in HTA should set up models and tools to deliver timely information. The aim of this workshop is to point out the timeliness of HTA as crucial in the decision-making process as a mismanagement of HTA system could be an obstacle to an appropriate healthcare policy. Else more, the workshop would like to critically present examples where research was on time or too late to be included in the decision-making process and elaborate on possible models to successfully deal with timeliness of HTA deliverables in particular at hospital level. Key messages The timeframe of HTA should ensure the accuracy of information and of methodological and legal steps, without forgetting the timeliness of delivery. Models and instruments should be implemented in order to guarantee the timeliness of HTA reports.

scholarly journals Disinvestment Activities and Candidates in the Health Technology Assessment Community: An Online Survey

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (03) ◽  
pp. 189-194
Author(s):  
Julie Polisena ◽  
Gerhard Trunk ◽  
Iñaki Gutierrez-Ibarluzea ◽  
Roberta Joppi
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Future Research ◽  
International Network ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Inappropriate Use ◽  
Services Delivery ◽  
Survey Results

AbstractObjectivesAs healthcare decision makers continue to face challenges in health services delivery to their patients, disinvestment programs are being established for a sustainable healthcare system. This study aimed to collect data and information by means of a survey of disinvestment candidates and ongoing disinvestment projects in the health technology assessment (HTA) community.MethodsAn online survey was conducted to collect information on disinvestment candidates and activities from members of the Health Technology Assessment International Disinvestment & Early Awareness Interest Group, the EuroScan International Network and International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment.ResultsAmong the 362 invitees, twenty-four unique responses were received, and almost 70 percent were involved in disinvestment initiatives. The disinvestment candidates identified represented a range of health technologies. Evidence or signaling of clinical ineffectiveness or inappropriate use typically led to the nomination of disinvestment candidates. Health technology assessments and reassessments were usually conducted to evaluate the technology in question, and decisions usually led to the limited use of the technology. Barriers to disinvestment decisions included the strength of interest and advocacy groups, insufficient data for assessments, a systematic decision process and political challenges, while obstacles to their implementation were clinicians’ reluctance and insufficient funding and incentives.ConclusionsThe survey results suggested that disinvestment activities are occurring in the HTA community, especially in the public sector. Future research can further investigate the processes and methods used to reach and implement disinvestment decisions from our survey respondents and explore to form closer ties between the HTA and clinical communities.

EUR-ASSESS Project Subgroup Report on Methodology:Methodological Guidance for the Conduct of Health Technology Assessment

1997 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 186-219 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alessandro Liberati ◽  
Trevor A. Sheldon ◽  
H. David Banta
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Benefits And Costs

Health technology assessment (HTA) is primarily concerned with the consequences (benefits and costs) of health care and health policy decisions. Because decision making is complex and outcomes are often uncertain, it is helpful to attempt to assess the consequences. The quality of decisions can be improved by a process that provides a consistent framework for identifying and assessing health technologies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document