technology assessment
Recently Published Documents





2022 ◽  
Vol 162 ◽  
pp. 128-129
Arnaud Bayle ◽  
Antoine Italiano ◽  
Christophe Massard ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Aurelien Marabelle

Healthcare ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 124
Carlo Ricciardi ◽  
Adelmo Gubitosi ◽  
Donatella Vecchione ◽  
Giuseppe Cesarelli ◽  
Francesco De Nola ◽  

Total thyroidectomy is very common in endocrine surgery and the haemostasis can be obtained in different ways across surgery; recently, some devices have been developed to support this surgical phase. In this paper, a health technology assessment is conducted through the define, measure, analyse, improve, and control cycle of the Six Sigma methodology to compare traditional total thyroidectomy with the surgical operation performed through a new device in an overall population of 104 patients. Length of hospital stay, drain output, and time for surgery were considered the critical to qualities in order to compare the surgical approaches which can be considered equal regarding the organizational, ethical, and security impact. Statistical tests (Kolmogorov–Smirnov, t test, ANOVA, Mann–Whitney, and Kruskal–Wallis tests) and visual management diagrams were employed to compare the approaches, but no statistically significant difference was found between them. Considering these results, this study shows that the introduction of the device to perform total thyroidectomy does not guarantee appreciable clinical advantages. A cost analysis to quantify the economic impact of the device into the practice could be a future development. Healthy policy leaders and clinicians who are requested to make decisions regarding the supply of biomedical technologies could benefit from this research.

2022 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Juan Carlos Rejon-Parrilla ◽  
Jaime Espin ◽  
David Epstein

Abstract Background What constitutes innovation in health technologies can be defined and measured in a number of ways and it has been widely researched and published about. However, while many countries mention it as a criterion for pricing or reimbursement of health technologies, countries differ widely in how they define and operationalise it. Methods We performed a literature review, using a snowballing search. In this paper, we explore how innovation has been defined in the literature in relation to health technology assessment. We also describe how a selection of countries (England, France, Italy, Spain and Japan) take account of innovation in their health technology assessment frameworks and explore the key methodologies that can capture it as a dimension of value in a new health technology. We propose a way of coming to, and incorporating into health technology assessment systems, a definition of innovation for health technologies that is independent of other dimensions of value that they already account for in their systems, such as clinical benefit. We use Spain as an illustrative example of how innovation might be operationalised as a criterion for decision making in health technology assessment. Results The countries analysed here can be divided into 2 groups with respect to how they define innovation. France, Japan and Italy use features such as severity, unmet need and therapeutic added value as indicators of the degree of innovation of a health technology, while England, Spain consider the degree of innovation as a separate and additional criterion from others. In the case of Spain, a notion of innovation might be constructed around concepts of `step-change’, `convenience’, `strength of evidence base’ and `impact on future research & development’. Conclusions If innovation is to be used as operational criteria for adoption, pricing and reimbursement of health technologies, the concept must be clearly defined, and it ought to be independent from other value dimensions already captured in their health technology assessment systems.

2022 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Cong Huang ◽  
Carolina Oi Lam Ung ◽  
Haishaerjiang Wushouer ◽  
Lin Bai ◽  
Tao Huang ◽  

Abstract Background In China, health technology assessment (HTA) has recently been adopted in pricing negotiation for medicine listing in the National Reimbursement Drug List. At present, how HTA is applied to inform the decision-making process remains underreported. In order to explore how the adoption of HTA was translated into listing and price negotiation results in light of the confidential nature of the negotiating process, this study aimed to compare the negotiated price and the clinical benefit of selected targeted anticancer medicines (TAMs) involved in the 2019 negotiation. Main text Among 16 TAMs successfully negotiated, only four TAMs representing four indication groups had appropriate reference medicines for comparison and were, therefore, included in the analysis. The price and clinical benefit of the four TAMs were compared against one or two reference medicines with the same initial indications. The sales prices for nine TAMs before and after the negotiation were extracted from the centralized medication procurement system. Clinical benefits were evaluated based on evidence from published articles and clinical guidelines. The results suggested that, despite the application of HTA, both rational and irrational decisions had been made about the reimbursement of TAMs in the 2019 negotiation, warranting further investigation. Conclusion While the development and adoption of HTA has seen significant progress in China, actions are needed to ensure that the adoption of HTA is effectively applied in decisions on the reimbursement of medicines.

2022 ◽  
Christopher Jouannet ◽  
Kristian Amadori ◽  
Athanasios Papageorgiou

Design Issues ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-54
Merlijn Smits ◽  
Geke Ludden ◽  
Ruben Peters ◽  
Sebastian J. H. Bredie ◽  
Harry van Goor ◽  

Abstract In this article, we aim to strengthen the basis of designing for values, by relating it to philosophy of technology. We start by discussing several theories to understand technology-induced value mediation: mediation approach, technology assessment methods, and types of value change. We continue by connecting these theories to design practice by proposing a new design for values methodology: Values that Matter. This methodology provides the means to evaluate moral mediation of technology during the design process and to responsibly design for it. The methodology is explained by the redesign of continuous vital sign monitoring technology in hospitalized patients.

Rachel R. J. Kalf ◽  
Marloes Zuidgeest ◽  
Diana M. J. Delnoij ◽  
Marcel L. Bouvy ◽  
Wim G. Goettsch

Abstract Objective Although health technology assessment (HTA) and healthcare quality improvement are distinct processes, a greater level of alignment in outcome measures used may increase the quality and efficiency of data collection. This study evaluates the agreement in outcome measures used in oncology for healthcare quality improvement and HTAs, and how these align to the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) standard sets. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional comparative analysis of ICHOM sets focusing on oncological indications and publicly available measures for healthcare quality and HTA reports published by the National Health Care Institute from the Netherlands and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence from the United Kingdom. Results All ICHOM sets and HTAs used overall survival, whereas quality improvement used different survival estimates. Different progression estimates for cancer were used in HTAs, ICHOM sets, and quality improvement. Data on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was recommended in all ICHOM sets and all HTAs, but selectively for quality improvement. In HTAs, generic HRQoL questionnaires were preferred, whereas, in quality improvement and ICHOM sets, disease-specific questionnaires were recommended. Unfavorable outcomes were included in all HTAs and all ICHOM sets, but not always for quality improvement. Conclusions Although HTA and quality improvement use outcome measures from the same domains, a greater level of alignment seems possible. ICHOM may provide input on standardized outcome measures to support this alignment. However, residual discrepancies will remain due to the different objectives of HTA and quality improvement.

Christian Suharlim ◽  
Ritu Kumar ◽  
Julian Salim ◽  
Meenakshi Mehra ◽  
Colin Gilmartin ◽  

Abstract Objective This study aims to identify and codify the facilitators and barriers to help implementing partners institutionalize health technology assessment (HTA) successfully and navigate complex systems for health-related policy making. Methods We searched for peer-reviewed and gray literature articles examining HTA programs globally using six databases. Keywords used as a guide for capturing articles included “health technology assessment,” “barrier,” and “facilitator” and their synonyms. Search results were scrutinized for duplicates and screened through a review of titles and abstracts. A full-text review was conducted exploring articles’ coverage of twenty-seven evaluation criteria across four primary areas of interest: barriers/facilitators, motivations, guidelines, and institutional frameworks. Results A total of 18,599 records were identified for duplication check, title, and abstract review. A total of 1,594 articles underwent full-text review, leading to a final synthesis of 262 studies. We found that ninety-seven articles discussed barriers/facilitators, with fifty-three of those discussing local capacity and unavailable human resources. Out of the sixty-six articles discussing motivations, forty-two cited the interest in supporting the decision-making process for, and promoting, appropriate resource allocation. Of the sixty-one articles that discussed guidelines and institutional framework, twenty-one articles described HTA as an independent national unit, and sixteen described their HTA unit as a unit within the Ministry of Health (MOH). Conclusions This systematic review unpacks the dynamic and relevant contexts for understanding the HTA institutionalization process to help policy makers and practitioners achieve tangible progress in confronting the most critical issues facing priority setting and HTA institutionalization.

Matheus O. de Almeida ◽  
Thais Montezuma ◽  
Haliton A. de Oliveira Júnior ◽  
Cleusa Pinheiro Ferri

Abstract Introduction Mini health technology assessment (HTA) reports have been used to support policy makers and health systems by providing a timely summary of scientific evidence. The objective of this meta-epidemiologic study was to evaluate the quality of reporting of mini-HTA reports published in Brazil. Methods An electronic search for all mini-HTA reports published between 2014 and March 2019 was conducted in the SISREBRATS and CONITEC databases. The study selection and data extraction were performed by two independent assessors. The following data were extracted: bibliographic data; research question; characteristics of the population, health technologies and outcomes assessed; eligibility criteria; information about searches and study selection; risk of bias assessment; quality of evidence assessment; synthesis of results; and recommendation about the technology evaluated. A descriptive analysis was used to summarize the information retrieved from all the included mini-HTA reports. Results We included 103 mini-HTA reports, the great majority of which (92.3 percent) focused on the coverage of the technologies in the healthcare system, with more than 60 percent being about drugs. Only five mini-HTA reports (4.8 percent) gave reasons for the choice of outcomes, and fifteen (14.5 percent) discriminated between primary and secondary outcomes. All mini-HTAs reported the databases searched and 99 percent of them reported using Medline. Sixty percent of the mini-HTA reported assessing the risk of bias, and 52 percent reported assessing the quality of evidence. Conclusion The quality of reporting of the mini-HTA reports performed in Brazil is insufficient and needs to be improved to guarantee transparency and replicability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document