scholarly journals EUPATI Guidance for Patient Involvement in Medicines Research and Development: Health Technology Assessment

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy Hunter ◽  
Karen Facey ◽  
Victoria Thomas ◽  
David Haerry ◽  
Kay Warner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Research And Development ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Health Technology

Evaluation of patient involvement strategies in health technology assessment in Spain: the viewpoint of HTA researchers

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Toledo-Chávarri ◽  
Yolanda Triñanes Pego ◽  
Eva Reviriego Rodrigo ◽  
Nora Ibargoyen Roteta ◽  
Blanca Novella-Arribas ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
First Year ◽  
Important Health ◽  
And Performance ◽  
The Individual

Objective The Spanish Network of Agencies for Assessing National Health System Technologies and Performance (RedETS) defined a patient involvement (PI) framework for health technology assessment (HTA) activities in 2016. The aim of this study is to evaluate the process and impact of those PI initiatives that were implemented in the first year following the publication of this new framework. Methods A survey was sent to those HTA researchers who implemented PI in RedETS projects. Responses were reviewed by two authors. An adapted thematic analysis was performed and the results were later discussed by all authors. Results Six responses from six agencies/units were analyzed. The objectives of PI initiatives were the following: inclusion of patient perspectives, preferences and values; elicitation of important health outcomes measures; and barriers, facilitators, or suggestions for implementation. Different methods were used for PI: surveys, focus groups, in depth interviews, and participation in an expert panel. Five main themes emerged: (i) challenges with the recruitment process, (ii) needs identified, (iii) impact of PI, (iv) lessons learned, and (v) suggestions for the future. Conclusions PI initiatives within the RedETS framework were tailored to each HTA project, its specific goals and the individual needs and resources of each HTA agency. The results also pointed out how PI has a relevant impact that has enriched RedETS products providing key information on experiences, values, and preferences of patients, contributions that benefit the HTA and the process of drawing up recommendations. The main challenges were related to recruitment processes and capacity building.

EVALUATION OF PATIENT INVOLVEMENT IN A HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (3) ◽  
pp. 166-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mylène Tantchou Dipankui ◽  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
Marie Desmartis ◽  
France Légaré ◽  
Florence Piron ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Term Care ◽  
Direct Participation ◽  
Patient Representatives ◽  
Patient Consultation ◽  
The Impact

Objectives: We sought to evaluate patient involvement (consultation and direct participation) in the assessment of alternative measures to restraint and seclusion among adults in short-term hospital wards (in psychiatry) and long-term care facilities for the elderly.Methods: We conducted individual semi-structured interviews with thirteen stakeholders: caregivers, healthcare managers, patient representatives, health technology assessment (HTA) unit members, researchers, and members of the local HTA scientific committee. Data were collected until saturation. We carried out content analysis of two HTA reports and four other documents that were produced in relation with this HTA. We also used field notes taken during formal meetings and informal discussions with stakeholders. We performed thematic analysis based on a framework for assessing patient involvement in HTA. We then triangulated data.Results: For the majority of interviewees, patient consultation enriched the content of the HTA report and its recommendations. This also made it possible to suggest other alternatives that could reduce the use of restraint and seclusion and helped confirm some views and comments from healthcare professionals consulted in this HTA. The direct participation of patient representatives enabled rephrasing of some findings so as to bring the patient perspective to the HTA report.Conclusions: Patient consultation was seen as having directly influenced the content of the HTA report while direct participation made it possible to rephrase some findings. This is one of few studies to assess the impact of patient involvement in HTA and more such studies are needed to identify the best ways to improve the input of such involvement.

scholarly journals PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: A FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 256-264 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Abelson ◽  
Frank Wagner ◽  
Deirdre DeJean ◽  
Sarah Boesveld ◽  
Franςois-Pierre Gauvin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
System Quality ◽  
The Public ◽  
Core Elements ◽  
Patient Values ◽  
Optimal Approach ◽  
Public And Patient Involvement

Objective: As health technology assessment (HTA) organizations in Canada and around the world seek to involve the public and patients in their activities, frameworks to guide decisions about whom to involve, through which mechanisms, and at what stages of the HTA process have been lacking. The aim of this study was to describe the development and outputs of a comprehensive framework for involving the public and patients in a government agency's HTA process.Methods: The framework was informed by a synthesis of international practice and published literature, a dialogue with local, national and international stakeholders, and the deliberations of a government agency's public engagement subcommittee in Ontario, Canada.Results: The practice and literature synthesis failed to identify a single, optimal approach to involving the public and patients in HTA. Choice of methods should be considered in the context of each HTA stage, goals for incorporating societal and/or patient perspectives into the process, and relevant societal and/or patient values at stake. The resulting framework is structured around four actionable elements: (i) guiding principles and goals for public and patient involvement (PPI) in HTA, (ii) the establishment of a common language to support PPI efforts, (iii) a flexible array of PPI approaches, and (iv) on-going evaluation of PPI to inform adjustments over time.Conclusions: A public and patient involvement framework has been developed for implementation in a government agency’s HTA process. Core elements of this framework may apply to other organizations responsible for HTA and health system quality improvement.

Ethical Challenges Related to Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 253-256 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meredith Vanstone ◽  
Julia Abelson ◽  
Julia Bidonde ◽  
Kenneth Bond ◽  
Raquel Burgess ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Engagement ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Technology Policy ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Policy Decisions ◽  
The Past ◽  
Ethical Violations

AbstractIncluding information and values from patients in HTA has the potential to improve both the process and outcomes of health technology policy decisions. Accordingly, funding and structural incentives to include patients in HTA activities have increased over the past several years. Unfortunately, these incentives have not yet been accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources, time, or commitment to responsiveness. In this Perspectives piece, we reflect on our collective experiences participating in, conducting, and overseeing patient engagement activities within HTA to highlight the ethical challenges associated with this area of activity. While we remain committed to the idea that patient engagement activities strengthen the findings, relevance, and legitimacy of health technology policy, we are deeply concerned about the potential for these activities to do ethical harm. We use this analysis to call for action to introduce strong protections against ethical violations that may harm patients participating in HTA engagement activities.

scholarly journals Exploration of the visibility of patient input in final recommendation documentation for three health technology assessment bodies

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (3) ◽  
pp. 197-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet L. Wale ◽  
Melissa Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Group ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Appraisal Committee ◽  
Cancer Drug ◽  
Clear Understanding ◽  
Patient Groups ◽  
Patient Expert

Health technology assessment (HTA) recommendations informed by patient concerns are seen to ensure democracy and legitimacy. We explored how written and oral patient involvement in two HTAs was reported on in publicly available final recommendations and discussion summaries of appraisal committees from three HTA bodies. We aimed to gain insights into how patient input was utilized by appraisal committees to better understand the goals of patient involvement and how these are being achieved. In each of the three HTA bodies, templated submission questionnaires provide a formal process for seeking written patient group input. Additionally, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) selects patient experts to provide a templated submission and attend appraisal committee meetings. For Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), a patient advocate and clinician combined meeting (PACE) discussed the cancer drug, referred to in the final recommendation. The discussion summaries of all appraisal committees contained references to patient involvement. Where two mechanisms for patient involvement were provided, oral input from the expert patients and PACE were more clearly documented than information from written patient group submissions. NICE reports focused on the perspective of the patient expert. The SMC report highlighted feedback from the PACE throughout. We suggest that the lack of clear reporting on the use of patient group input in deliberations and therefore accountability to patient groups limits progress in patient involvement in HTA. Patient groups may therefore not have a clear understanding of what information they can best provide to inform deliberations, and in reporting back to members.

Development of a decisional flowchart for meaningful patient involvement in Health Technology Assessment

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Ana Toledo-Chávarri ◽  
Marie-Pierre Gagnon ◽  
Yolanda Álvarez-Pérez ◽  
Lilisbeth Perestelo-Pérez ◽  
Yolanda Triñanes Pego ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Involvement ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Patient Organizations ◽  
Methodological Challenges ◽  
Development Outcomes

Abstract Introduction This paper aims to describe the development of a flowchart to guide the decisions of researchers in the Spanish Network for Health Technology Assessment of the National Health System (RedETS) regarding patient involvement (PI) in Health Technology Assessment (HTA). By doing so, it reflects on current methodological challenges in PI in the HTA field: how best to combine PI methods and what is the role of patient-based evidence. Methods A decisional flowchart for PI in HTA was developed between March and April 2019 following an iterative process, reviewed by the members of the PI Interest Group and other RedETS members and validated during an online deliberative meeting. The development of the flowchart was based on a previous methodological framework assessed in a pilot study. Results The guidelines on how to involve patients in HTA in the RedETS were graphically represented in a flowchart. PI must be included in all HTA reports, except those that assess technologies with no relevant impact on patients’ experiences, values, and preferences. Patient organizations or expert patients related to the topic of the HTA report must be identified and invited. These patients can participate in protocol development, outcomes' identification, assessment process, and report review. When the technology assessed affects in a relevant way patient experiences, values, and preferences, patient-based evidence should be included through a systematic literature review or a primary study. Conclusions The decisional flowchart for PI in HTA contributes to the current methodological challenges by proposing a combination of direct involvement and patient-based evidence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document