scholarly journals Balancing health and financial protection in health benefit package design

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine T. Lofgren ◽  
David A. Watkins ◽  
Solomon T. Memirie ◽  
Joshua A. Salomon ◽  
Stéphane Verguet
Keyword(s):  
Health Benefit ◽  
Financial Protection ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Package Design

scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Benefit Package Design – Part II: A Practical Guide

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wija Oortwijn ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Rob Baltussen
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Exchange ◽  
Stakeholder Involvement ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Companion Paper ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Package Design ◽  
Academic Knowledge ◽  
Key Issues ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background. Countries around the world are using health technology assessment (HTA) for health benefit package design. Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) are a practical and stepwise approach to enhance legitimate health benefit package design based on deliberation between stakeholders to identify, reflect and learn about the meaning and importance of values, informed by evidence on these values. This paper reports on the development of practical guidance on EDPs, while the conceptual framework of EDPs is described in a companion paper. Methods. The first guide on EDPs (2019) is further developed based on academic knowledge exchange, surveying 27 HTA bodies and 66 experts around the globe, and the implementation of EDPs in several countries. We present the revised steps of EDPs and how selected HTA bodies (in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Scotland, Thailand and the United Kingdom) organize key issues of legitimacy in their processes. This is based on a review of literature via PubMed and HTA bodies’ websites. Results. HTA bodies around the globe vary considerable in how they address legitimacy (stakeholder involvement ideally through participation with deliberation; evidence-informed evaluation; transparency; and appeal) in their processes. While there is increased attention for improving legitimacy in decision-making processes, we found that the selected HTA bodies are still lacking or just starting to develop activities in this area. We provide recommendations on how HTA bodies can improve on this. Conclusion. The design and implementation of EDPs is in its infancy. We call for a systematic analysis of experiences of a variety of countries, from which general principles on EDPs might subsequently be inferred.

scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Legitimate Health Benefit Package Design − Part I: Conceptual Framework

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rob Baltussen ◽  
Maarten Jansen ◽  
Wija Oortwijn
Keyword(s):  
Conceptual Framework ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
General Concept ◽  
Added Value ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Package Design ◽  
Academic Knowledge ◽  
The World ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Deliberative Processes

Background. Countries around the world are increasingly rethinking the design of their health benefit packages to achieve universal health coverage and health technology assessment (HTA) bodies support governments in these decisions. Coverage decision-making is an intrinsically complex and value-laden political process, but value frameworks currently employed by HTA bodies do not sufficiently account for this complex reality. Methods. Several years ago, evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were developed to address this issue. An EDP is a practical and stepwise approach for HTA bodies to enhance legitimate health benefit package design based on deliberation between stakeholders to identify, reflect and learn about the meaning and importance of values, and to interpret available evidence on these values. We further developed the conceptual framework and initial 2019 guidance based on academic knowledge exchange, analysing practices of HTA bodies, surveying HTA bodies and experts around the globe, and implementation of EDPs in several countries around the world. Results. EDPs stem from the general concept of legitimacy, which is translated into four elements – stakeholder involvement ideally operationalised through stakeholder participation with deliberation; evidence-informed evaluation; transparency; and appeal. The 2021 practical guidance distinguishes six practical steps of a HTA process and provides recommendations on how these elements can be implemented in each of these steps. Conclusion. There is an increased attention for legitimacy, deliberative processes for HTA and health benefit package design, but the development of theories and methods for such processes remain behind. The added value of EDPs lies in the operationalisation of the general concept of legitimacy into practical guidance for HTA bodies.

scholarly journals Scoping literature review on the basic health benefit package and its determinant criteria

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramin Hayati ◽  
Peivand Bastani ◽  
Mohammad Javad Kabir ◽  
Zahra Kavosi ◽  
Ghasem Sobhani
Keyword(s):  
Literature Review ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Basic Health ◽  
Scoping Literature Review

The implications of benefit package design: the impact on poor Thai households of excluding renal replacement therapy

2009 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phusit Prakongsai ◽  
Natasha Palmer ◽  
Preecha Uay-Trakul ◽  
Viroj Tangcharoensathien ◽  
Anne Mills
Keyword(s):  
Renal Replacement Therapy ◽  
Replacement Therapy ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Package Design ◽  
The Impact

PNS45 APPLYING A RAPID REVIEW METHODOLOGY TO INFORM THE UPDATE OF ARGENTINA'S HEALTH BENEFIT PACKAGE

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 ◽  
pp. S71
Author(s):  
V. Alfie ◽  
A. Alcaraz ◽  
S. Garcia Marti ◽  
L.A. Gonzalez ◽  
S. Virgilio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Health Benefit ◽  
Rapid Review ◽  
Benefit Package

PD43 Value-Based Procedure For Updating The Italian Health Benefit Package

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (S1) ◽  
pp. 144-144
Author(s):  
Marco Marchetti ◽  
Primiano Iannone ◽  
Luz Irene Urbina ◽  
Laura Camoni ◽  
Alessia Biondi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Central Government ◽  
National Health System ◽  
Health Benefit ◽  
Benefit Package ◽  
Pilot Phase ◽  
Ministry Of Health ◽  
Administrative Process ◽  
Roles And Responsibilities ◽  
Italian Context ◽  
New Evidence

Introduction:In Italy, the central government sets the health benefit package (denominated “Livelli Essenziali di Assistenza” - LEAs) of the National Health System (NHS), which must be provided to all residents. In 2004, the Italian Ministry of Health established a new technical body, the National LEA Commission, responsible for updating LEAs.Methods:Recently, the Ministry has commissioned to the National Institute of Health (NIH) the development of a new value-based procedure for updating the health benefit package for the Italian NHS, supporting the National LEA Commission. A review and comparison of value frameworks and decisional models was performed in order to select a framework and a model that can be applied to the Italian context, design an administrative process for the update procedure, and propose approaches for: (i) the assessment of services currently included in the health benefit basket and of those planned to be incorporated, (ii) the process of appraisal and decision-making to be adopted by the Commission.Results:The NIH outlined an evidence and value-based three-step (i.e. priority setting, assessment and appraisal) administrative process that integrates roles and responsibilities of the different Italian healthcare institutions involved in LEA updating and HTA.Conclusions:The NIH is proposing to the Ministry of Health and to the National LEA Commission a new evidence and value-based procedure for updating the health benefit package for the Italian NHS. This procedure is entering a pilot phase in which potential gaps can be identified and minimized for its subsequent implementation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document