{"title":"The Process of Listing Prostheses and Medical Devices in Thailand’s Universal Health Coverage","authors":"Manthana Laichapis PharmD , Thanisa Thathong PharmD , Supisara Kanjanaphrut PharmD , Sirada Thansuwanwong PharmD , Yotsaya Kunlamas PharmD , Puree Anantachoti PhD , Bunchai Chongmelaxme PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.vhri.2024.100990","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>This study aimed to characterize the processes of listing prostheses and medical devices in all insurance schemes.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>A literature review was performed, and in-depth interviews were conducted with the representatives of 6 insurance agencies. Civil Servant Medical Benefits Scheme (CSMBS), Social Security Scheme, Local Government Officer Scheme (LGOS), State Enterprise Scheme (SES), Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS), and Non-Thai Resident Scheme (NTRS).</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>The outcomes of interest were structure details and the body of the working groups, listing processes, and key assessment criteria. Each insurance scheme’s process can be summarized in 5 steps: (1) receiving the proposed topics of health technologies, (2) screening, (3) selection, (4) consideration, and (5) approval and publicization. Notably, the organizational structures and working group compositions vary across schemes, leading to differences in process activities and assessment criteria. LGOS and SES are exceptions because they follow the application process of CSMBS. UCS demonstrates the most transparent process, providing specific working groups that are competent in undertaking each activity. The processes of listing prostheses and medical devices vary across health insurance in Thailand, leading to varying numbers of health technologies covered by insurance schemes.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study characterizes prostheses and medical device listing processes in 6 Thai Universal Health Coverage insurance schemes (CSMBS, Social Security Scheme, UCS, LGOS, SES, and Non-Thai Resident Scheme). Variations in processes result in differing technology listings. It offers essential insights for healthcare professionals and policy makers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":23497,"journal":{"name":"Value in health regional issues","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Value in health regional issues","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212109924000232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
This study aimed to characterize the processes of listing prostheses and medical devices in all insurance schemes.
Methods
A literature review was performed, and in-depth interviews were conducted with the representatives of 6 insurance agencies. Civil Servant Medical Benefits Scheme (CSMBS), Social Security Scheme, Local Government Officer Scheme (LGOS), State Enterprise Scheme (SES), Universal Coverage Scheme (UCS), and Non-Thai Resident Scheme (NTRS).
Results
The outcomes of interest were structure details and the body of the working groups, listing processes, and key assessment criteria. Each insurance scheme’s process can be summarized in 5 steps: (1) receiving the proposed topics of health technologies, (2) screening, (3) selection, (4) consideration, and (5) approval and publicization. Notably, the organizational structures and working group compositions vary across schemes, leading to differences in process activities and assessment criteria. LGOS and SES are exceptions because they follow the application process of CSMBS. UCS demonstrates the most transparent process, providing specific working groups that are competent in undertaking each activity. The processes of listing prostheses and medical devices vary across health insurance in Thailand, leading to varying numbers of health technologies covered by insurance schemes.
Conclusions
This study characterizes prostheses and medical device listing processes in 6 Thai Universal Health Coverage insurance schemes (CSMBS, Social Security Scheme, UCS, LGOS, SES, and Non-Thai Resident Scheme). Variations in processes result in differing technology listings. It offers essential insights for healthcare professionals and policy makers.