Literature DB >> 32940233

Are We Making a Difference? A Qualitative Study of Patient Engagement at the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: Perspectives of Patient Groups.

Rebecca E Mercer1, Alexandra Chambers2, Helen Mai2, Valerie McDonald2, Carole McMahon2, Kelvin K W Chan3.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Despite wide support for patient involvement in health technology assessments (HTA), determining meaningful engagement is complex. This article explores experiences and perceptions among patient groups participating in the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH)'s pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review (pCODR) process.
METHODS: We created a qualitative interview study comprising 22 semi-structured telephone interviews with individuals representing 21 different patient groups registered with the pCODR process. The analysis used a qualitative descriptive approach employing techniques from grounded theory.
RESULTS: Patient groups view the ability to make submissions to the pCODR process as a meaningful activity closely aligned with organizational priorities. Concurrently, they face substantial resource challenges to prepare submissions, including high opportunity costs and difficulty accessing needed literature and finding relevant patients. Although patient groups felt that CADTH is committed to transparency, they expressed considerable uncertainty around the direct impact of their submissions and desired additional avenues for engagement.
CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a strong commitment by patient groups to participate in the pCODR process despite uncertainty about how their submissions are used to inform HTA recommendations. Identifying opportunities to provide both financial and nonfinancial resources to patient groups is crucial to encouraging and supporting their meaningful participation in HTA processes.
Copyright © 2020 ISPOR–The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  health technology assessment; patient engagement

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32940233     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2020.06.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  3 in total

1.  Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment: A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force.

Authors:  Wija Oortwijn; Don Husereau; Julia Abelson; Edwine Barasa; Diana Dana Bayani; Vania Canuto Santos; Anthony Culyer; Karen Facey; David Grainger; Katharina Kieslich; Daniel Ollendorf; Andrés Pichon-Riviere; Lars Sandman; Valentina Strammiello; Yot Teerawattananon
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2022-06-03       Impact factor: 2.406

2.  Designing and Implementing Deliberative Processes for Health Technology Assessment: A Good Practices Report of a Joint HTAi/ISPOR Task Force.

Authors:  Wija Oortwijn; Don Husereau; Julia Abelson; Edwine Barasa; Diana Dana Bayani; Vania Canuto Santos; Anthony Culyer; Karen Facey; David Grainger; Katharina Kieslich; Daniel Ollendorf; Andrés Pichon-Riviere; Lars Sandman; Valentina Strammiello; Yot Teerawattananon
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2022-06       Impact factor: 5.101

3.  Integrating health technology assessment and the right to health: a qualitative content analysis of procedural values in South African judicial decisions.

Authors:  Michael J DiStefano; Safura Abdool Karim; Carleigh B Krubiner
Journal:  Health Policy Plan       Date:  2022-05-12       Impact factor: 3.547

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.