Literature DB >> 23241276

Current status of health technology reassessment of non-drug technologies: survey and key informant interviews.

Laura E Leggett1, Gail Mackean, Tom W Noseworthy, Lloyd Sutherland, Fiona Clement.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical and economic effects of a technology currently used in the health care system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives. Little is known about current international HTR practices. The objective of this research was to summarize experience-based information gathered from international experts on the development, initiation and implementation of a HTR program.
METHODS: A mixed methods approach, using a survey and in-depth interviews, was adopted. The survey covered 8 concepts: prioritization/identification of potentially obsolete technologies; program development; implementation; mitigation; program championing; stakeholder engagement; monitoring; and reinvestment. Members of Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) formed the sampling frame. Participation was solicited via email and the survey was administered online using SurveyMonkey. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. To gather more in-depth knowledge, semi-structured interviews were conducted among organizations with active HTR programs. Interview questions were developed using the same 8 concepts. The hour-long interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using constant comparative analysis.
RESULTS: Ninety-five individuals responded to the survey: 49 were not discussing HTR, 21 were beginning to discuss HTR, nine were imminently developing a program, and 16 participants had programs and were completing reassessments. The survey results revealed that methods vary widely and that although HTR is a powerful tool, it is currently not being used to its full potential. Of the 16 with active programs, nine agreed to participate in follow-up interviews. Interview participants identified early and extensive stakeholder engagement as the most important factors for success. A lack of top-down support and financial and human resources are inhibiting program development. DISCUSSION: HTR is in its infancy. Although HTRs are being conducted, there are no standardized approaches. However, much can be learned from current international work. Future work should focus on developing a comprehensive methodology, reporting the processes of reassessments and sharing successes and challenges in a common platform.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23241276      PMCID: PMC3542085          DOI: 10.1186/1478-4505-10-38

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Res Policy Syst        ISSN: 1478-4505


  4 in total

Review 1.  Health technology reassessment of non-drug technologies: current practices.

Authors:  Laura Leggett; Tom W Noseworthy; Mahmood Zarrabi; Diane Lorenzetti; Lloyd R Sutherland; Fiona M Clement
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.188

2.  Health technology reassessment: scope, methodology, & language.

Authors:  Tom Noseworthy; Fiona Clement
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 2.188

3.  Exploring policy-makers' perspectives on disinvestment from ineffective healthcare practices.

Authors:  Adam G Elshaug; Janet E Hiller; John R Moss
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 2.188

4.  Challenges in Australian policy processes for disinvestment from existing, ineffective health care practices.

Authors:  Adam G Elshaug; Janet E Hiller; Sean R Tunis; John R Moss
Journal:  Aust New Zealand Health Policy       Date:  2007-10-31
  4 in total
  12 in total

1.  Sustainability in Health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 1: introducing a series of papers reporting an investigation of disinvestment in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Sally Green; Wayne Ramsey; Kelly Allen; Richard King
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 2.655

Review 2.  Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 4: exploring opportunities and methods for consumer engagement in resource allocation in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Henry Ko; Cara Waller; Pamela Sloss; Pamela Williams
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-05-05       Impact factor: 2.655

3.  Sustainability in health care by allocating resources effectively (SHARE) 3: examining how resource allocation decisions are made, implemented and evaluated in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Cara Waller; Vanessa Brooke
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-05-09       Impact factor: 2.655

4.  Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 6: investigating methods to identify, prioritise, implement and evaluate disinvestment projects in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Vanessa Brooke; Tim Dyer; Cara Waller; Richard King; Wayne Ramsey; Duncan Mortimer
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-05-25       Impact factor: 2.655

5.  Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 7: supporting staff in evidence-based decision-making, implementation and evaluation in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Cara Waller; Tim Dyer; Vanessa Brooke; Marie Garrubba; Angela Melder; Catherine Voutier; Anthony Gust; Dina Farjou
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 2.655

6.  Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 5: developing a model for evidence-driven resource allocation in a local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Kelly Allen; Cara Waller; Sally Green; Richard King; Wayne Ramsey; Cate Kelly; Malar Thiagarajan
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Achieving optimal technology use: A proposed model for health technology reassessment.

Authors:  Lesley Jj Soril; Gail MacKean; Tom W Noseworthy; Laura E Leggett; Fiona M Clement
Journal:  SAGE Open Med       Date:  2017-04-19

Review 8.  Towards understanding the de-adoption of low-value clinical practices: a scoping review.

Authors:  Daniel J Niven; Kelly J Mrklas; Jessalyn K Holodinsky; Sharon E Straus; Brenda R Hemmelgarn; Lianne P Jeffs; Henry Thomas Stelfox
Journal:  BMC Med       Date:  2015-10-06       Impact factor: 8.775

9.  Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 9: conceptualising disinvestment in the local healthcare setting.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Sally Green; Wayne Ramsey; Kelly Allen; Richard King
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  Sustainability in Health care by Allocating Resources Effectively (SHARE) 10: operationalising disinvestment in a conceptual framework for resource allocation.

Authors:  Claire Harris; Sally Green; Adam G Elshaug
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2017-09-08       Impact factor: 2.655

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.