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 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.

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 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 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.

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.

INTRODUCTION OF INNOVATIVE MEDICAL DEVICES AT FRENCH UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS: AN OVERVIEW OF HOSPITAL-BASED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT INITIATIVES

2015 ◽  
Vol 31 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 12-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolas Martelli ◽  
Mathilde Billaux ◽  
Isabelle Borget ◽  
Judith Pineau ◽  
Patrice Prognon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Medical Device ◽  
Medical Devices ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Local Health ◽  
University Hospitals ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Management Processes

Objectives: Local health technology assessment (HTA) to determine whether new health technologies should be adopted is now a common practice in many healthcare organizations worldwide. However, little is known about hospital-based HTA activities in France. The objective of this study was to explore hospital-based HTA activities in French university hospitals and to provide a picture of organizational approaches to the assessment of new and innovative medical devices.Methods: Eighteen semi-structured interviews with hospital pharmacists were conducted from October 2012 to April 2013. Six topics were discussed in depth: (i) the nature of the institution concerned; (ii) activities relating to innovative medical devices; (iii) the technology assessment and decision-making process; (iv) the methodology for technology assessment; (v) factors likely to influence decisions and (vi) suggestions for improving the current process. The interview data were coded, collated and analyzed statistically.Results: Three major types of hospital-based HTA processes were identified: medical device committees, innovation committees, and “pharmacy & management” processes. HTA units had been set up to support medical device and innovation committees for technology assessment. Slow decision making was the main limitation to both these committee-based approaches. As an alternative, “pharmacy & management” processes emerged as a means of rapidly obtaining a formal assessment.Conclusions: This study provides an overview of hospital-based HTA initiatives in France. We hope that it will help to promote hospital-based HTA activities in France and discussions about ways to improve and harmonize practices, through the development of national guidelines and/or a French mini-HTA tool, for example.

Health Technology Assessment in Malaysia: Past, Present, and Future

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (6) ◽  
pp. 446-451 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarimin Roza ◽  
Sabirin Junainah ◽  
Mudla Mohamed Ghazali Izzuna ◽  
Ku Abdul Rahim Ku Nurhasni ◽  
Mohd Aminuddin Mohd Yusof ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Impact Evaluation ◽  
Quantitative Description ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
The Past ◽  
Horizon Scanning ◽  
Report Quality

AbstractObjectivesThe aim of this study was to provide a comprehensive overview of the evolution of health technology assessment (HTA) in Malaysia over the past decade.MethodsWe described the evolution of HTA program in Malaysia based on review of administrative data, publicly available information and quantitative description of impact evaluation.ResultsHealth Technology Assessment HTA was formalized in Malaysia in 1995 as a central structure within the Ministry of Health, Malaysia in 1995. Expansion of activities demonstrated over the years including Horizon Scanning of health technologies and implementation of evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Improvement on the processes in terms of types of report, quality, monitoring, and impact evaluation as well as accessibility was also carried out. Examples of impact/influence of the reports have also been demonstrated.ConclusionsHTA program in Malaysia has evolved over the past decades. Its role in policy formulation and decision making of health technologies has become more significant over the years and is foreseen to be bigger in the future. As a trusted source of evidence, HTA in Malaysia will continue to strengthen the health system by advocating informed decision making and value-based medicine. As other countries in this region is trying to establish their own HTA processes and procedures, this review on the evolution of the HTA program in Malaysia might give some insights on developing a sustainable HTA program.

OP102 Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis In The Field Of Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 38-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrey Avdeyev ◽  
Adlet Tabarov ◽  
Amir Akhetov ◽  
Nasrulla Shanazarov ◽  
Aigul Kaptagayeva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Multiple Criteria ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis ◽  
Managerial Decision ◽  
Managerial Decision Making ◽  
Health Technologies

Introduction:One of the main tools for Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment (HB HTA) is the preparation of a mini-health technology assessment (HTA) report. Despite the high value of the results of mini-HTA reports for hospital decision-makers, the classical mini-HTA report does not allow a direct comparison of several health technologies among themselves.Methods:Based on the analysis of international experience of using the principles of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in the field of HB HTA, we created and approved our own managerial decision-making model which includes five standardized multiple criteria. The value (weight) of each criterion was defined as the arithmetic mean obtained as a result of interviewing hospital decision-makers and an HTA expert group.Results:Five standardized multiple criteria were included in the structure of our mini-HTA report. These criteria presented the main results of assessment of the viability of implementing new health technologies (HTs) in hospital practice and contain the following: i) Novelty/innovation; ii) Comparative clinical effectiveness and safety; iii) Relevance (demand); iv) Economic effectiveness; and, v) Payback period. We conducted the modeling of various options of HTA results by using multiple criteria, which allowed us to determine the threshold values of the evaluated HTs corresponding to their priority for implementation: i) High priority - HTs are recommended for implementation; ii) Medium priority - HTs can be recommended only if there are sufficient financial resources in hospital; and, iii) Low priority - HTs may be recommended only if there are strong reasons for their need.Conclusions:Integration of the principles of MCDA in the structure of mini-HTA reports gives the opportunity to i) make comparative assessments of implementing new health technologies based on standardized criteria; ii) determine the priority for implementation of newly evaluated health technologies; iii) avoid the influence of subjective factors on the managerial decision-making in hospitals.

OP114 The Public's Role In Understanding The Value Of Health Technologies

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 43-44
Author(s):  
Tania Stafinski ◽  
Jackie Street ◽  
Devidas Menon
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Informed Decision ◽  
Informed Decision Making ◽  
The Public ◽  
Health Technologies ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
Definition Of

Introduction:Increasingly, health technology assessment (HTA) organizations have instituted mechanisms for involving patients in assessment and review processes. The reasons are obvious—to understand the “patient experience” with a disease and to ensure that patient perspectives are considered during deliberations about the value of new treatments. More recently there have been efforts to engage the public in HTAs and HTA-informed decision-making processes. However, the goals of these efforts have not been well articulated. This may be attributable to the lack of a shared definition of “the public”. The objective of this study was to develop a common understanding of the term “the public” within the context of HTA.Methods:The following were conducted: a survey of HTA organizations; a systematic review; consultation with Health Technology Assessment international's Special Interest Group on Patient and Citizen Involvement; and a workshop comprising representatives from patient organizations, industry, and HTA bodies in Canada.Results:In many HTA processes, the terms “public” and “patients” are synonymous. Definitions found in scholarly articles vary and depend on the rationale for involving the public in a particular issue. Through consultations it became clear that, in the context of HTA, the definition depends on understanding what is missing from current deliberations around the value of new health technologies. There was consensus among workshop participants that: (i) “patients” and “the public” are not the same; (ii) the role of the public may be to ensure societal values are reflected in HTAs and HTA-informed decision-making processes (e.g. serving an audit function); and (iii) a legitimate definition of “the public” could be: “A non-aligned community member with no commercial or professional interest in the HTA process who is not a patient or member of a stakeholder group”.Conclusions:Consensus on the use of the terms “patient” and “public” will support rigorous, evidence-based public and patient engagement in HTA. The proposed definition indicates a way forward in this debate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document