scholarly journals Evolution of health technology assessment: best practices of the pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review

2015 ◽  
pp. 287
Author(s):  
Isabelle Chabot ◽  
Judith Glennie ◽  
Angela Rocchi
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Oncology Drug ◽  
Drug Review

What does meaningful look like? A qualitative study of patient engagement at the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: perspectives of reviewers and payers

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 72-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda Rozmovits ◽  
Helen Mai ◽  
Alexandra Chambers ◽  
Kelvin Chan
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Patient Engagement ◽  
Patient Advocacy ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Advocacy Groups ◽  
Oncology Drug ◽  
Patient Advocacy Groups ◽  
Drug Review

Objectives While there is wide support for patient engagement in health technology assessment, determining what constitutes meaningful (as opposed to tokenistic) engagement is complex. This paper explores reviewer and payer perceptions of what constitutes meaningful patient engagement in the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review process. Methods Qualitative interview study comprising 24 semi-structured telephone interviews. A qualitative descriptive approach, employing the technique of constant comparison, was used to produce a thematic analysis. Results Submissions from patient advocacy groups were seen as meaningful when they provided information unavailable from other sources. This included information not collected in clinical trials, information relevant to clinical trade-offs and information about aspects of lived experience such as geographic differences and patient and carer priorities. In contrast, patient submissions that relied on emotional appeals or lacked transparency about their own methods were seen as detracting from the meaningfulness of patient engagement by conflating health technology assessment with other functions of patient advocacy groups such as fundraising or public awareness campaigns, and by failing to provide credible information relevant to deliberations. Conclusions This study suggests that misalignment of stakeholder expectations remains an issue even for a well-regarded health technology assessment process that has promoted patient engagement since its inception. Support for the technical capacity of patient groups to participate in health technology assessment is necessary but not sufficient to address this issue fully. There is a fundamental tension between the evidence-based nature of health technology assessment and the experientially oriented culture of patient advocacy. Divergent notions of what constitutes evidence and how it should be used must also be addressed.

INTEGRATING HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PRINCIPLES IN FORMULARY MANAGEMENT

2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 81-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Teng ◽  
Ai Leng Khoo ◽  
Ying Jiao Zhao ◽  
Liang Lin ◽  
Boon Peng Lim
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Pharmacoeconomic Evaluation ◽  
Management Program ◽  
Project Team ◽  
Public Healthcare ◽  
Formulary Management ◽  
Drug Review

Objectives: Effective formulary management in healthcare institutions safeguards rational drug use and optimizes health outcomes. We implemented a formulary management program integrating the principles of health technology assessment (HTA) to improve the safe, appropriate, and cost-effective use of medicine in Singapore.Methods: A 3-year formulary management program was initiated in 2011 in five public healthcare institutions. This program was managed by a project team comprising HTA researchers. The project team worked with institutional pharmacy and therapeutics (P&T) committees to: (i) develop tools for formulary drug review and decision making; (ii) enhance the HTA knowledge and skills of formulary pharmacists and members of P&T committees; (iii) devise a prioritization framework to overcome resource constraints and time pressure; and (iv) conceptualize and implement a framework to review existing formulary.Results: Tools that facilitate drug request submission, drug review, and decision making were developed for formulary drug inclusion. A systematic framework to review existing formulary was also developed and tested in selected institutions. A competency development plan was rolled out over 2 years to enhance formulary pharmacists’ proficiency in systematic literature search and review, meta-analysis, and pharmacoeconomic evaluation. The plan comprised training workshops and on-the-job knowledge transfer between the project team and institutional formulary pharmacists through collaborating on selected drug reviews. A resource guide that consolidated the tools and templates was published to encourage the adoption of best practices in formulary management.Conclusions: Based on the concepts of HTA, we implemented an evidence-based approach to optimize formulary management.

Health technology assessment: Choice between a cytotoxic safety cabinet and an isolator for oncology drug reconstitution in Tunisia

2020 ◽  
pp. 107815522094713
Author(s):  
Manel Boufaied ◽  
Mehdi Bouhlel ◽  
Mohamed Ali Soussi ◽  
Olfa Lazreg ◽  
Myriam Razgallah Khrouf
Keyword(s):  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Negative Pressure ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Operating Costs ◽  
Air Treatment ◽  
Oncology Drug ◽  
Purchase Cost ◽  
Implementation Costs ◽  
The One

Introduction In order to implement a centralized cytotoxic reconstitution unit (CCRU), a study was conducted to compare the implementation costs of a CCRU equipped with a cytotoxic safety cabinet (CSC) and one equipped with an isolator with negative pressure. Materials and methods This study compares items such as infrastructure, air treatment and CCRU qualification costs, equipment’s purchase and qualifications costs, as well as staff dressing costs. Two plans were elaborated according to the international recommendations in a way that they respond to the necessary requirements in both cases. Requests for quotes for the compared items were sent to different suppliers. Results The implementations’ cost of a CCRU equipped with a CSC is cheaper than the one equipped with an isolator. The price of an isolator is much higher than a CSC; its qualification is also more expensive. However, the requirements and the costs for the air treatment and the dressing of the staff are less in the case of an isolator. The overall cost of the CCRU’s implementation is approximately 1.3 times higher in the case of an isolator. However, by excluding the equipment purchase cost, the overall cost of a CSC’s implementation becomes higher. Conclusion For Tunisia, it seems that the CSC is the most adapted. However, this work should be completed by the comparison of the CCRU’s operating costs in order to optimize the resources and figure out the cheapest system.

scholarly journals Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for HTA Around the Globe: Exploring the Next Frontiers of HTA and Best Practices Comment on "Use of Evidence-informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe"

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Unni Gopinathan ◽  
Trygve Ottersen ◽  
Pascale-Renée Cyr ◽  
Kalipso Chalkidou
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Public Justification ◽  
Public Health Interventions ◽  
New Knowledge ◽  
Key Steps ◽  
Deliberative Processes

This comment reflects on an article by Oortwijn, Jansen, and Baltussen about the use and features of ‘evidence-informed deliberative processes’ (EDPs) among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world and the need for more guidance. First, we highlight procedural aspects that are relevant across key steps of EDP, focusing on conflict of interest, the different roles of stakeholders throughout a HTA and public justification of decisions. Second, we discuss new knowledge and models needed to maximize the value of deliberative processes at the expanding frontiers of HTA, paying special attention to when HTA is applied in primary care, employed for public health interventions, and is produced through international collaboration.

scholarly journals On the integration of early health technology assessment in the innovation process: reflections from five stakeholders

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (5) ◽  
pp. 481-485
Author(s):  
Marcia Tummers ◽  
Kari Kværner ◽  
Laura Sampietro-Colom ◽  
Markus Siebert ◽  
Murray Krahn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Medical Technology ◽  
Innovation Process ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Value Assessment ◽  
Early Assessment ◽  
Early Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Early Health

AbstractEarly health technology assessment (HTA), which includes all methods used to inform industry and other stakeholders about the potential value of new medical products in development, including methods to quantify and manage uncertainty, has seen many applications in recent years. However, it is still unclear how such early value assessments can be integrated into the technology innovation process. This commentary contributes to the discussion on the purposes early HTA can serve. Similarities and differences in the perspectives of five stakeholders (i.e., the hospital, the patient, the assessor, the medical device industry, and the policy maker) on the purpose, value, and potential challenges of early HTA are described. All five stakeholders agreed that integrating early HTA in the innovation process has the possibility to shape and refine an innovation, and inform research and development decisions. The early assessment, using a variety of methodologies, can provide insights that are relevant for all stakeholders but several challenges, for example, feasibility and responsibility, need to be addressed before early HTA can become standard practice. For early evaluations to be successful, all relevant stakeholders including patients need to be involved. Also, nimble, flexible assessment methods are needed that fit the dynamics of medical technology. Best practices should be shared to optimize both the innovation process and the methods to perform an early value assessment.

CONSIDER CONTEXT AND STAKEHOLDERS

2012 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 166-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Sampietro-Colom
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Health Technology Assessment ◽  
Technology Assessment ◽  
Process Development ◽  
Health Technology ◽  
Policy Environments ◽  
Set Up

Health technology assessment (HTA) is now 35 years old (1). During this time, the science and use of HTA has evolved enormously, adapting to changing healthcare and policy environments. Today, the HTA community has strong methods and procedures to produce HTA (5–7;10), and its results are increasingly used worldwide for decision making. It seems therefore that the time has arrived to set up best practices and to benchmark HTA processes and organizations. The work initiated by Drummond et al. is highly valued, because it opens a new area of needed work following the HTA community's previous emphasis on methodological and process development.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document