Literature DB >> 27766998

CHANGING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PARADIGMS?

Don Husereau1, Chris Henshall2, Laura Sampietro-Colom3, Sarah Thomas4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Health technology assessment (HTA) has to innovate to best support changing health system environments and to help provide access to valuable innovation under fiscal constraint.
METHODS: Issues associated with changing HTA paradigms were identified through scoping and explored through deliberation at a meeting of industry and HTA leaders.
RESULTS: Five broad areas of change (engagement, scientific dialogue, research prioritization, adaptive approaches, and real world data) were identified. The meeting focused on two themes derived from these: re-thinking scientific dialogue and multi-stakeholder engagement, and re-thinking value, affordability, and access. Earlier and ongoing engagement to steer the innovation process and help achieve appropriate use across the technology lifecycle was perceived as important but would be resource intensive and would require priority setting. Patients need to be involved throughout, and particularly at the early stages. Further discussion is needed on the type of body best suited to convening the dialogue required. There was agreement that HTA must continue to assess value, but views differed on the role that HTA should play in assessing affordability and on appropriate responses to challenges around affordability. Enhanced horizon scanning could play an important role in preparing for significant future investments.
CONCLUSIONS: Early and ongoing multi-stakeholder engagement and revisiting approaches to valuing innovation are required. Questions remain as to the most appropriate role for HTA bodies. Changing HTA paradigms extend HTA's traditional remit of being responsive to decision-makers demands to being more proactive and considering whole system value.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Financial management; Health technology assessment; Patient participation; Stakeholder engagement; Value-based purchasing

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27766998     DOI: 10.1017/S0266462316000386

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  6 in total

1.  Framework for Evaluating and Implementing Inpatient Portals: a Multi-stakeholder Perspective.

Authors:  Daniel M Walker; Jennifer L Hefner; Cynthia J Sieck; Timothy R Huerta; Ann Scheck McAlearney
Journal:  J Med Syst       Date:  2018-07-16       Impact factor: 4.460

2.  Ethics in HTA: Examining the "Need for Expansion".

Authors:  Payam Abrishami; Wija Oortwijn; Bjørn Hofmann
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2017-10-01

3.  The Importance of and Challenges with Adopting Life-Cycle Regulation and Reimbursement in Canada.

Authors:  Melanie McPhail; Christopher McCabe; Dean A Regier; Tania Bubela
Journal:  Healthc Policy       Date:  2022-02

4.  Potential Barriers of Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment in Central and Eastern European Countries.

Authors:  Maria Dimitrova; Ivett Jakab; Zornitsa Mitkova; Maria Kamusheva; Konstantin Tachkov; Bertalan Nemeth; Antal Zemplenyi; Dalia Dawoud; Diana M J Delnoij; François Houýez; Zoltan Kalo
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-07-28

5.  Policy Options for Infliximab Biosimilars in Inflammatory Bowel Disease Given Emerging Evidence for Switching.

Authors:  Don Husereau; Brian Feagan; Carl Selya-Hammer
Journal:  Appl Health Econ Health Policy       Date:  2018-06       Impact factor: 2.561

6.  Treatment With Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes in Advanced Melanoma: Evaluation of Early Clinical Implementation of an Advanced Therapy Medicinal Product.

Authors:  Melanie A Lindenberg; Valesca P Retèl; Joost H van den Berg; Marnix H Geukes Foppen; John B Haanen; Wim H van Harten
Journal:  J Immunother       Date:  2018 Nov/Dec       Impact factor: 4.456

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.