Identifying the Need for Good Practices in Health Technology Assessment: Summary of the ISPOR HTA Council Working Group Report on Good Practices in HTA

被引:79
作者
Kristensen, Finn Borlum [1 ]
Husereau, Don [2 ,3 ]
Huic, Mirjana [4 ]
Drummond, Michael [5 ]
Berger, Marc L.
Bond, Kenneth [6 ]
Augustovski, Federico [7 ]
Booth, Andrew [8 ]
Bridges, John F. P. [9 ]
Grimshaw, Jeremy [10 ,11 ]
IJzerman, Maarten J. [12 ,13 ]
Jonsson, Egon [14 ]
Ollendorf, Daniel A. [15 ]
Ruether, Alric [16 ]
Siebert, Uwe [3 ,17 ,18 ,19 ]
Sharma, Jitendar [20 ]
Wailoo, Allan [8 ,21 ]
机构
[1] Univ Southern Denmark, Fac Hlth Sci, Odense, Denmark
[2] Univ Ottawa, Sch Epidemiol Publ Hlth & Prevent Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[3] UMIT Univ Hlth Sci Med Informat & Technol, Dept Publ Hlth Hlth Serv Res & Hlth Technol Asses, Hall In Tirol, Austria
[4] Agcy Qual & Accreditat Hlth Care & Social Welf, Zagreb, Croatia
[5] Univ York, York, N Yorkshire, England
[6] CADTH, Patient Engagement Eth & Int Affairs, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[7] Inst Clin Effectiveness & Hlth Policy IECS, Econ Evaluat & HTA Dept, Buenos Aires, DF, Argentina
[8] Univ Sheffield, ScHARR, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
[9] Ohio State Univ, Coll Med, Dept Biomed Informat, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[10] Univ Ottawa, Cochrane Canada, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[11] Univ Ottawa, Med, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[12] Univ Melbourne, Sch Populat & Global Hlth, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
[13] Univ Twente, Dept Hlth Technol & Serv Res, Enschede, Netherlands
[14] Inst Hlth Econ, Edmonton, AB, Canada
[15] Tufts Univ, Ctr Evaluat Value & Risk Hlth CEVR, Boston, MA 02111 USA
[16] Inst Qual & Efficiency Hlth Care IQWiG, Int Affairs, Cologne, Germany
[17] ONCOTYROL Ctr Personalized Canc Med, Div Hlth Technol Assessment, Innsbruck, Austria
[18] Harvard Med Sch, Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Dept Radiol, Inst Technol Assessment, Boston, MA USA
[19] Harvard TH Chan Sch Publ Hlth, Dept Hlth Policy & Management, Boston, MA USA
[20] AP MedTech Zone & Advisor Hlth, Dept Hlth & Family Welf, Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, India
[21] NICE Decis Support Unit, Sheffield, S Yorkshire, England
关键词
CARE DECISION-MAKING; DISCRETE-CHOICE EXPERIMENTS; VALUE ASSESSMENT FRAMEWORKS; TASK-FORCE; ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; PATIENTS PERSPECTIVES; ETHICAL ANALYSIS; CRITERIA; IMPACT; RECOMMENDATIONS;
D O I
10.1016/j.jval.2018.08.010
中图分类号
F [经济];
学科分类号
02 ;
摘要
The systematic use of evidence to inform healthcare decisions, particularly health technology assessment (HTA), has gained increased recognition. HTA has become a standard policy tool for informing decision makers who must manage the entry and use of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and other technologies (including complex interventions) within health systems, for example, through reimbursement and pricing. Despite increasing attention to HTA activities, there has been no attempt to comprehensively synthesize good practices or emerging good practices to support population-based decision-making in recent years. After the identification of some good practices through the release of the ISPOR Guidelines Index in 2013, the ISPOR HTA Council identified a need to more thoroughly review existing guidance. The purpose of this effort was to create a basis for capacity building, education, and improved consistency in approaches to HTA-informed decision-making. Our findings suggest that although many good practices have been developed in areas of assessment and some other key aspects of defining HTA processes, there are also many areas where good practices are lacking. This includes good practices in defining the organizational aspects of HTA, the use of deliberative processes, and measuring the impact of HTA. The extent to which these good practices are used and applied by HTA bodies is beyond the scope of this report, but may be of interest to future researchers. Copyright (c) 2019, ISPOR-The Professional Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc.
引用
收藏
页码:13 / 20
页数:8
相关论文
共 131 条
  • [81] Constructing Experimental Designs for Discrete-Choice Experiments: Report of the ISPOR Conjoint Analysis Experimental Design Good Research Practices Task Force
    Johnson, F. Reed
    Lancsar, Emily
    Marshall, Deborah
    Kilambi, Vikram
    Muehlbacher, Axel
    Regier, Dean A.
    Bresnahan, Brian W.
    Kanninen, Barbara
    Bridges, John F. P.
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2013, 16 (01) : 3 - 13
  • [82] HTA Implementation Roadmap in Central and Eastern European Countries
    Kalo, Zoltan
    Gheorghe, Adrian
    Huic, Mirjana
    Csanadi, Marcell
    Kristensen, Finn Boerlum
    [J]. HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2016, 25 : 179 - 192
  • [83] The HTA Core Model®-10 Years of Developing an International Framework to Share Multidimensional Value Assessment
    Kristensen, Finn Borlum
    Lampe, Kristian
    Wild, Claudia
    Cerbo, Marina
    Goettsch, Wim
    Becla, Lidia
    [J]. VALUE IN HEALTH, 2017, 20 (02) : 244 - 250
  • [84] How can research organizations more effectively transfer research knowledge to decision makers?
    Lavis, JN
    Robertson, D
    Woodside, JM
    McLeod, CB
    Abelson, J
    [J]. MILBANK QUARTERLY, 2003, 81 (02) : 221 - +
  • [85] Mapping the integration of social and ethical issues in health technology assessment
    Lehoux, Pascale
    Williams-Jones, Bryn
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2007, 23 (01) : 9 - 16
  • [86] Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual)
    Lewin, Simon
    Glenton, Claire
    Munthe-Kaas, Heather
    Carlsen, Benedicte
    Colvin, Christopher J.
    Guelmezoglu, Metin
    Noyes, Jane
    Booth, Andrew
    Garside, Ruth
    Rashidian, Arash
    [J]. PLOS MEDICINE, 2015, 12 (10)
  • [87] Liberati A, 2009, BMJ, V62, pe1
  • [88] Lomas J., 2005, FINAL REPORT CONCEPT
  • [89] Lysdahl Kristin Bakke, 2016, GMS Health Technol Assess, V12, pDoc01, DOI 10.3205/hta000124
  • [90] Marsh K., 2017, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to Support Healthcare Decisions