Health technology assessment: A comprehensive framework for evidence-based recommendations in Ontario

被引:49
作者
Johnson, Ana P. [1 ]
Sikich, Nancy J. [2 ]
Evans, Gerald [1 ,3 ]
Evans, William [4 ,5 ]
Giacomini, Mita [6 ]
Glendining, Murray [4 ]
Krahn, Murray [7 ,9 ]
Levin, Les [2 ]
Oh, Paul [8 ]
Perera, Charmaine [10 ]
机构
[1] Queens Univ, Dept Med, Div Infect Dis, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
[2] Minist Hlth & Long Term Care, Med Advisory Secretariat, Toronto, ON M5G 2N6, Canada
[3] Kingston Gen Hosp, Div Infect Dis, Dept Med, Kingston, ON K7L 3N6, Canada
[4] Hamilton Hlth Sci, Hamilton, ON L8L 2X2, Canada
[5] McMaster Univ, Dept Oncol, Hamilton, ON L8V 5C2, Canada
[6] McMaster Univ, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Biostat, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[7] Univ Toronto, Dept Hlth Policy Management & Evaluat, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
[8] Univ Toronto, Dept Med, Toronto, ON M4G 3M5, Canada
[9] Toronto Gen Hosp, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
[10] Minist Educ, Policy Program Branch, Toronto, ON M7A 1L2, Canada
关键词
Health technology assessment; Health technology policy analysis; Ontario health technology advisory committee; Medical advisory secretariat; Prioritization; CARE; POLICY;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462309090199
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: This study describes the development of a framework for health technology decisions, for Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee (OHTAC) in Ontario, Canada. Methods: OHTAC convened a "Decision Determinants Sub-Committee" in January 2007, which undertook a systematic literature review and conducted key informant interviews to develop an explicit decision-making framework. Results: The "Decision Determinants Sub-Committee" offered recommendations about decision criteria, and the process by which decisions are made. Decision criteria include (i) overall clinical benefit, (ii) consistency with societal and ethical values, (iii) value for money, and (iv) feasibility of adoption into the health system. The decision process should be transparent and fair and should use a deliberative process in delivering recommendations. Conclusions: This methodology is currently being pilot tested in a live environment: OHTAC. It will be evaluated and revised according to its feasibility, acceptability, and perceived usefulness.
引用
收藏
页码:141 / 150
页数:10
相关论文
共 25 条
[1]  
AARON H.J., 1991, Serious and Unstable Condition: Financing America's Health Care
[2]  
[Anonymous], HLTH TECHNOL ASSESS
[3]  
[Anonymous], BRIT MED J
[4]   High and rising health care costs. Part 2: Technologic innovation [J].
Bodenheimer, T .
ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE, 2005, 142 (11) :932-937
[5]   Linking evidence from health technology assessments to policy and decision making: The Alberta Model [J].
Borowski, Henry Z. ;
Brehaut, Jon ;
Hailey, David .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN HEALTH CARE, 2007, 23 (02) :155-161
[6]   Managed care, medical technology, and health care cost growth: A review of the evidence [J].
Chernew, ME ;
Hirth, RA ;
Sonnad, SS ;
Ermann, R ;
Fendrick, AM .
MEDICAL CARE RESEARCH AND REVIEW, 1998, 55 (03) :259-288
[7]   NICE's use of cost effectiveness as an exemplar of a deliberative process [J].
Culyer, Anthony J. .
HEALTH ECONOMICS POLICY AND LAW, 2006, 1 (03) :299-318
[8]  
Daniels N., 2002, SETTING LIMITS FAIRL, DOI [10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195149364.001.0001, DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195149364.001.0001]
[9]   Accountability for reasonableness - an update [J].
Daniels, Norman ;
Sabin, James E. .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2008, 337 (7675) :a1850
[10]   An analytical framework for immunization programs in Canada [J].
Erickson, LJ ;
De Wals, P ;
Farand, L .
VACCINE, 2005, 23 (19) :2470-2476