Framework for describing and classifying decision-making systems using technology assessment to determine the reimbursement of health technologies (fourth hurdle systems)

被引:60
作者
Hutton, J [1 ]
McGrath, C
Frybourg, JM
Tremblay, M
Bramley-Harker, E
Henshall, C
机构
[1] Univ York, Dept Hlth Sci, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[2] UBC, European Off, MEDTAP Inst, London WCIA 2NS, England
[3] Pfizer Ltd, Dept Outcomes Res, Tadworth KT20 7NS, Surrey, England
[4] Tremblay Consulting Int, Niagara On The Lake, ON L0S 1J0, Canada
[5] NERA Econ Consulting, London W1C 1BE, England
[6] London Sch Hyg & Trop Med, Dept Publ Hlth & Policy, London WC1 7HT, England
[7] Univ York, Innovat Ctr, Enterprise & Innovat Off, York YO10 5DG, N Yorkshire, England
关键词
D O I
10.1017/S0266462306050781
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Objectives: Australia, Canada, and many European countries now use various forms of health technology assessment (HTA) in decision making regarding the reimbursement of drugs and other health technologies. To achieve a better understanding of the potential for use of HTA in this context, an analytical framework was developed to describe and classify existing fourth hurdle systems. Methods: Based on a review of published literature, and official documentation, the key aspects of a fourth hurdle system were identified at two levels: policy implementation and individual technology decision. Characteristics of the systems were grouped under four main headings: constitution and governance, objectives, use of evidence and decision processes, and accountability. The comprehensiveness and relevance of this framework was assessed by an independent group of experts in HTA. A pilot study was undertaken, using only published sources, to test the feasibility of obtaining the information needed to complete the framework. Results: The framework was found to be sufficiently broad to encompass all the issues of interest regarding the systems, but the proportion of information available from published sources was variable between sections of the framework and between countries, with average availability of 45 percent. Conclusions: The analytical framework will help researchers and policy makers in individual countries to understand their own systems and will allow some preliminary sharing of experience between countries. More experience of its application is needed to judge whether it will provide the basis for more formal comparison of systems and whether it will determine their appropriateness for particular decision contexts.
引用
收藏
页码:10 / 18
页数:9
相关论文
共 13 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1992, GUID PHARM IND PREP
[2]  
Baladi JF, 1998, HEALTH ECON, V7, P221, DOI 10.1002/(SICI)1099-1050(199805)7:3<221::AID-HEC341>3.0.CO
[3]  
2-N
[4]   The development of health technology assessment [J].
Banta, D .
HEALTH POLICY, 2003, 63 (02) :121-132
[5]  
Hjelmgren J, 2001, Value Health, V4, P225, DOI 10.1046/j.1524-4733.2001.43040.x
[6]  
Institute of Medicine, 1985, ASS MED TECHN
[7]  
JONSSON E, 1985, INT J TECHNOL ASSESS, V1, P1
[8]   COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS APPLIED TO TREATMENT OF CHRONIC RENAL DISEASE [J].
KLARMAN, HE ;
FRANCIS, JO ;
ROSENTHAL, GD .
MEDICAL CARE, 1968, 6 (01) :48-54
[9]   Pharmaceutical industry's perspective on health technology assessment [J].
Lothgren, M ;
Ratcliffe, M .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2004, 20 (01) :97-101
[10]  
*NAT COORD CTR HTA, 1998, ANN REP NHS HLTH TEC