Developing a How-to-Guide for Health Technology Reassessment: "The HTR Playbook"

Background: To develop a knowledge translation (KT) tool that will provide guidance to stakeholders actively planning or considering implementation of a health technology reassessment (HTR) initiative. Methods: The KT tool is an international and collaborative endeavour between HTR researchers in Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Evidence from a meta-review of documented international HTR experiences and approaches provided the conceptual framing for the KT tool. The purpose, audience, format, and overall scope and content of the tool were established through iterative discussions and consensus. An initial version of the KT tool was beta-tested with an international community of relevant stakeholders (i.e., potential users) at the Health Technology Assessment International 2018 annual meeting. Results: An open access workbook, referred to as the HTR playbook, was developed. As a KT tool, the HTR playbook is intended to simplify the complex HTR planning process by navigating users step-by-step through 6 strategic domains: characteristics of the candidate health technology (The Stats and Projections), stakeholders to engage (The Team), potential facilitators and/or barriers within the policy context (The Playing Field), strategic use of different levers and tools (The Offensive Plays), unintended consequences (The Defensive Plays), and metrics and methods for monitoring and evaluation (Winning the Game). Conclusion: The HTR playbook is intended to enhance a user’s ability to successfully complete a HTR by helping them systematically consider the different elements and approaches to achieve the right care for the patient population in question.

Optimizing red blood cell transfusion practices in the intensive care unit: a multi-phased health technology reassessment

Background Health technology reassessment (HTR) is a process to manage existing health technologies to ensure ongoing optimal use. A model to guide HTR was developed; however, there is limited practical experience. This paper addresses this knowledge gap through the completion of a multi-phase HTR of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion practices in the intensive care unit (ICU). Objective The HTR consisted of three phases and here we report on the final phase: the development, implementation, and evaluation of behavior change interventions aimed at addressing inappropriate RBC transfusions in an ICU. Methods The interventions, comprised of group education and audit and feedback, were co-designed and implemented with clinical leaders. The intervention was evaluated through a controlled before-and-after pilot feasibility study. The primary outcome was the proportion of potentially inappropriate RBC transfusions (i.e., with a pre-transfusion hemoglobin of 70 g/L or more). Results There was marked variability in the monthly proportion of potentially inappropriate RBC transfusions. Relative to the pre-intervention phase, there was no significant difference in the proportion of potentially inappropriate RBC transfusions post-intervention. Lessons from this work include the importance of early and meaningful engagement of clinical leaders; tailoring the intervention modalities; and, efficient access to data through an electronic clinical information system. Conclusions It was feasible to design, implement, and evaluate a tailored, multi-modal behavior change intervention in this small-scale pilot study. However, early evaluation of the intervention revealed no change in technology use leading to reflection on the important question of how the HTR model needs to be improved.

PP100 Characteristics To Consider In A Knowledge Translation Theory, Model Or Framework For Health Technology Reassessment

IntroductionHealth technology reassessment (HTR) is a structured evidence-based assessment of an existing technology in comparison to its alternatives. The process results in the following four outputs: (i) increased use; (ii) decreased use; (iii) no change; or (iv) de-adoption. However, implementing these outputs remains a challenge. Knowledge translation (KT) can be applied to implement findings from the HTR process. This study sought to identify which characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) could be useful, specifically for decreasing the use of or de-adopting a technology.MethodsA qualitative descriptive approach was used to ascertain the perspectives of international KT and HTR experts on the characteristics of KT TMFs for decreasing the use of or de-adopting a technology. One-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes and sub-themes were deduced from the data through framework analysis using the following five distinctive steps: familiarization; identifying an analytic framework; indexing; charting; and mapping and interpretation. Themes and sub-themes were also mapped to existing KT TMFs.ResultsThirteen experts participated. The following three themes emerged as ideal characteristics of a KT TMF: (i) principles foundational for HTR: evidence-based, high usability, patient-centered, and ability to apply to micro, meso, and macro levels; (ii) levers of change: characterized as positive, neutral, or negative influences for changing behavior; and (iii) steps for knowledge to action: build the case for HTR, adapt research knowledge, assess context, select, tailor, and implement interventions, and assess impact. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research had the greatest number of ideal characteristics.ConclusionsApplication of KT TMFs to the HTR process has not been clearly established. This is the first study to provide an understanding of characteristics within KT TMFs that could be considered by users undertaking projects to decrease or de-adopt technologies. Characteristics to be considered within a KT TMF for implementing HTR outputs were identified. Consideration of these characteristics may guide users in choosing which KT TMF(s) to use when undertaking HTR projects.

Identification of knowledge translation theories, models or frameworks suitable for health technology reassessment: a survey of international experts

ObjectiveHealth technology reassessment (HTR) is a field focused on managing a technology throughout its life cycle for optimal use. The process results in one of four possible recommendations: increase use, decrease use, no change or complete withdrawal of the technology. However, implementation of these recommendations has been challenging. This paper explores knowledge translation (KT) theories, models and frameworks (TMFs) and their suitability for implementation of HTR recommendations.DesignCross-sectional survey.ParticipantsPurposeful sampling of international KT and HTR experts was administered between January and March 2019.MethodsSixteen full-spectrum KT TMFs were rated by the experts as ‘yes’, ‘partially yes’ or ‘no’ on six criteria: familiarity, logical consistency/plausibility, degree of specificity, accessibility, ease of use and HTR suitability. Consensus was determined as a rating of ≥70% responding ‘yes’. Descriptive statistics and manifest content analysis were conducted on open-ended comments.ResultsEleven HTR and 11 KT experts from Canada, USA, UK, Australia, Germany, Spain, Italy and Sweden participated. Of the 16 KT TMFs, none received ≥70% rating. When ratings of ‘yes’ and ‘partially yes’ were combined, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was considered the most suitable KT TMF by both KT and HTR experts (86%). One additional KT TMF was selected by KT experts: Knowledge to Action framework. HTR experts selected two additional KT TMFs: Co-KT framework and Plan-Do-Study-Act cycle. Experts identified three key characteristics of a KT TMF that may be important to consider: practicality, guidance on implementation and KT TMF adaptability.ConclusionsDespite not reaching an overall ≥70% rating on any of the KT TMFs, experts identified four KT TMFs suitable for HTR. Users may apply these KT TMFs in the implementation of HTR recommendations. In addition, KT TMF characteristics relevant to the field of HTR need to be explored further.

Characteristics of knowledge translation theories, models and frameworks for health technology reassessment: expert perspectives through a qualitative exploration

Background Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a process that systematically assesses technologies that are currently used in the health care system. The process results in four outputs: increase use or decrease use, no change, or de-adoption of a technology. Implementation of these outputs remains a challenge. The Knowledge Translation (KT) field enables to transfer/translate knowledge into practice. KT could help with implementation of HTR outputs. This study sought to identify which characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks could be useful, specifically for decreased use or de-adoption of a technology. Methods A qualitative descriptive approach was used to ascertain the perspectives of international KT and HTR experts on the characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks for decreased use or de-adoption of a technology. One-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted from September to December 2019. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes and sub-themes were deduced from the data through framework analysis using five distinctive steps: familiarization, identifying an analytic framework, indexing, charting, mapping and interpretation. Themes and sub-themes were also mapped to existing KT theories, models, and frameworks. Results Thirteen experts from Canada, United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Spain, and Sweden participated in the study. Three themes emerged that illustrated the ideal traits: principles that were foundational for HTR, levers of change, and steps for knowledge to action. Principles included evidence-based, high usability, patient-centered, and ability to apply to the micro, meso, macro levels. Levers of change were characterized as positive, neutral, or negative influences for changing behaviour for HTR. Steps for knowledge to action included: build the case for HTR, adapt research knowledge, assess context, select interventions, and assess impact. Of the KT theories, models, and frameworks that were mapped, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research had most of the characteristics, except ability to apply to micro, meso, macro levels. Conclusions Characteristics that need to be considered within a KT theory, model, and framework for implementing HTR outputs have been identified. Consideration of these characteristics may guide users to select relevant KT theories, models, and frameworks to apply to HTR projects.

PP506 Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) Of A Non-Drug Technology: Methods Used By A Regional HTA Unit

IntroductionAn environmental scan conducted by the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies (CADTH-March-2019) revealed that several health technology assessment (HTA) organisations are currently developing standard health technology reassessment (HTR) processes. Here we present methods used to conduct an HTR of a prioritization programme for non-immediate life-threatening urgent surgeries implemented in 2017 at a tertiary referral hospital in (Quebec-Canada). This HTR initiative was conducted by a regional HTA unit to optimize the programme efficiency and resources utilization as well as to motivate change in the clinical community of other hospitals within its healthcare network. Patient and healthcare personnel satisfaction levels towards the programme were also considered.MethodsIn this case study, HTR methods and outputs were elaborated using elements presented in the CADTH environmental scan and relevant publications identified through PubMed and in the grey literature. Documents in English and French, published between January 2002 and March 2019 were considered. Key stakeholders were consulted to identify barriers of the programme implementation to other hospitals in regards to aspects related either to the local medical practice or organizational factors.ResultsThe prioritization process was conducted using the same tool applied for HTA appraisal with the additional criterion that the HTR could facilitate the programme implementation. The research processes used in this HTR included: i) systematic review of the literature, ii) hospital database search (efficacy and resource utilization), iii) perceptions of healthcare teams and patients. HTR outputs consist of specific recommendations on implementation barriers and methods to monitor the impacts of the programme.ConclusionsIn this evolving field, sharing lessons from HTR methods provides information to develop standard adaptable processes to different contexts. Hence, this work applies HTR to a healthcare programme while most of the literature focuses on the HTR processes on drug and interventional medicine disinvestment. These elements represented HTR methods used from prioritization appraisal, research processes for evaluation and outputs used to plan the implementation and finally monitoring from a regional HTA unit. It also showcases that HTR being conducted as a structured evidence-based assessment adds value to a healthcare programme and could also facilitate its implementation.

Characteristics of Knowledge Translation Theories, Models and Frameworks for Health Technology Reassessment: Expert Perspectives Through a Qualitative Exploration

Background: Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a process that systematically assesses technologies that are currently used in the health care system. The process results in four outputs: increase use or decrease use, no change, or de-adoption of a technology. Implementation of these outputs remains a challenge. The Knowledge Translation (KT) field enables knowledge into practice. KT could help with implementation of HTR outputs. This study sought to identify which characteristics of KT theories, models, and frameworks (TMFs) could be useful, specifically for decrease use or de-adoption of a technology.Methods: A qualitative descriptive approach was used to ascertain the perspectives of international KT and HTR experts on the characteristics of KT TMFs for decrease use or de-adoption of a technology. One-to-one semi-structured interviews were conducted from September to December 2019. Interviews were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim. Themes and sub-themes were deduced from the data through framework analysis using five distinctive steps: familiarization, identifying an analytic framework, indexing, charting, mapping and interpretation. Themes and sub-themes were also mapped to existing KT TMFs.Results: Thirteen individuals from Canada, United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Germany, Spain, and Sweden participated in the study. Three themes emerged that illustrated the ideal traits of a KT TMF: principles that were foundational for HTR, levers of change, and steps for knowledge to action. Principles included evidence-based, high usability, patient-centered, and ability to apply to the micro, meso, macro levels. Levers of change were characterized as positive, neutral, or negative influences for changing behaviour for HTR. Steps for knowledge to action included: build the case for HTR, adapt research knowledge, assess context, select, tailor and implement interventions, and assess impact. Of the KT TMFs that were mapped, the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research had most of the characteristics, except ability to apply to micro, meso, macro levels. Conclusions: Application of KT TMFs to HTR has not been clearly understood. Characteristics that need to be considered within a KT TMF for implementing HTR outputs have been identified. Consideration of these characteristics within KT TMFs may guide users undertaking HTR projects.

Sustainability of healthcare systems in Asia: exploring the roles of horizon scanning and reassessment in the health technology assessment landscape

ObjectivesThe 2019 Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Asia Policy Forum (HAPF) discussed the role of horizon scanning (HS) and health technology reassessment (HTR) in supporting sustainable healthcare in Asia.MethodsDiscussions and presentations at the 2019 HAPF, informed by a literature review, results of a premeeting survey, and case studies of HTA agencies from the region form the basis of this paper.ResultsFive of the fourteen HTA agencies surveyed have established or are developing HS systems (HSSs), and six reported some experience with HTR. Although there were many differences in the respective HSSs, all were proactive and identified technologies within a 1–3-year time horizon. Commonalities included the criteria used to prioritize the technologies including burden and rarity of the disease, and cost to the health system and patients. Experience in HTR was not as extensive with most HTR activity being conducted on an ad hoc basis. Challenges for both HS and HTR include a lack of HTA capacity and good quality data, as well as a need for transparency and collaboration with industry.ConclusionsWith developing universal health care and HTA capacity in many countries in Asia, HS and HTR are in their infancy. Whilst several countries in the region are experienced in all facets of HTA, other countries are developing their HTA skill base. As such, there was a clear appetite for setting up a collaborative network in the Asia region to facilitate information sharing around HTA activities, and more specifically, HS and HTR methodologies, experiences, and assessments.

An evidence-based framework for identifying technologies of no or low-added value (NLVT)

ObjectiveTo synthetize the state of the art of methods for identifying candidate technologies for disinvestment and propose an evidence-based framework for executing this task.MethodsAn interpretative review was conducted. A systematic literature search was performed to identify secondary or tertiary research related to disinvestment initiatives and/or any type of research that specifically described one or more methods for identifying potential candidates technologies, services, or practices for disinvestment. An iterative and critical analysis of the methods described alongside the disinvestment initiatives was performed.ResultsSeventeen systematic reviews on disinvestment or related terms (health technology reassessment or medical reversal) were retrieved and methods of 45 disinvestment initiatives were compared. On the basis of this evidence, we proposed a new framework for identifying these technologies based on the wide definition of evidence provided by Lomas et al. The framework comprises seven basic approaches, eleven triggers and thirteen methods for applying these triggers, which were grouped in embedded and ad hoc methods.ConclusionsAlthough identification methods have been described in the literature and tested in different contexts, the proliferation of terms and concepts used to describe this process creates considerable confusion. The proposed framework is a rigorous and flexible tool that could guide the implementation of strategies for identifying potential candidates for disinvestment.