Are Medical Device Characteristics Included in HTA Methods Guidelines and Reports? A Brief Review.

IF 3.1 4区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-07-04 DOI:10.1007/s40258-024-00896-y
Rituparna Basu, Simon Eggington, Natalie Hallas, Liesl Strachan
{"title":"Are Medical Device Characteristics Included in HTA Methods Guidelines and Reports? A Brief Review.","authors":"Rituparna Basu, Simon Eggington, Natalie Hallas, Liesl Strachan","doi":"10.1007/s40258-024-00896-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>It is well accepted that medical devices (MDs) and procedures have several unique characteristics compared with pharmaceuticals, such as learning curve (LC), incremental innovation (II), dynamic pricing (DP), and organizational impact (OI). The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which these MD characteristics are routinely assessed by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and incorporated in their guidelines and reports. Three approaches were taken. First, a review of the most recent HTA methods guidelines from 14 selected HTA agencies and 5 HTA networks was undertaken. Next, HTA reports from these agencies were reviewed for inclusion of MD-specific characteristics for 16 selected MDs. Finally, a narrative literature review on this topic was conducted. A total of 13 of the included HTA organizations, and some HTA networks (2/5), have published either general or MD-specific method guidelines, whilst several addressed MD-specific characteristics. NICE included all four MD characteristics in their guidelines, but this did not equate to their inclusion in published HTA evaluations. European Network HTA (EUnetHTA) described the inclusion of LC (within patient safety) and OI within their guidance. The results highlight a lack of consistency. For the narrative review, 10/149 articles identified were reviewed. Most provided recommendations on challenges faced by HTAs, proposed steps to address uncertainties around MD characteristics and reported a lack of methodological guidance for evaluating MDs. A lack of inclusion of MD characteristics in HTA is a complex interplay of several important factors. For these characteristics to become a formal part of HTA of MDs in the future, clear guidance and frameworks are required to enable manufacturers to develop appropriate evidence, and HTA practitioners to assess their impact more broadly.</p>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-024-00896-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is well accepted that medical devices (MDs) and procedures have several unique characteristics compared with pharmaceuticals, such as learning curve (LC), incremental innovation (II), dynamic pricing (DP), and organizational impact (OI). The objective of this study was to determine the extent to which these MD characteristics are routinely assessed by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and incorporated in their guidelines and reports. Three approaches were taken. First, a review of the most recent HTA methods guidelines from 14 selected HTA agencies and 5 HTA networks was undertaken. Next, HTA reports from these agencies were reviewed for inclusion of MD-specific characteristics for 16 selected MDs. Finally, a narrative literature review on this topic was conducted. A total of 13 of the included HTA organizations, and some HTA networks (2/5), have published either general or MD-specific method guidelines, whilst several addressed MD-specific characteristics. NICE included all four MD characteristics in their guidelines, but this did not equate to their inclusion in published HTA evaluations. European Network HTA (EUnetHTA) described the inclusion of LC (within patient safety) and OI within their guidance. The results highlight a lack of consistency. For the narrative review, 10/149 articles identified were reviewed. Most provided recommendations on challenges faced by HTAs, proposed steps to address uncertainties around MD characteristics and reported a lack of methodological guidance for evaluating MDs. A lack of inclusion of MD characteristics in HTA is a complex interplay of several important factors. For these characteristics to become a formal part of HTA of MDs in the future, clear guidance and frameworks are required to enable manufacturers to develop appropriate evidence, and HTA practitioners to assess their impact more broadly.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
HTA 方法指南和报告中是否包含医疗器械特征?简要回顾。
众所周知,与药品相比,医疗器械(MD)和程序具有一些独特的特征,如学习曲线(LC)、渐进式创新(II)、动态定价(DP)和组织影响(OI)。本研究旨在确定卫生技术评估(HTA)机构在多大程度上对这些 MD 特性进行了常规评估,并将其纳入指南和报告中。研究采用了三种方法。首先,对 14 家选定的 HTA 机构和 5 个 HTA 网络的最新 HTA 方法指南进行了审查。其次,对这些机构的 HTA 报告进行了审查,以纳入 16 种选定 MD 的特定 MD 特征。最后,对这一主题进行了叙述性文献综述。在所纳入的 HTA 机构中,共有 13 家机构和一些 HTA 网络(2/5)发布了一般或特定于 MD 的方法指南,其中几家机构还涉及了特定于 MD 的特征。NICE 将所有四个 MD 特征都纳入了其指南,但这并不等同于将其纳入了已发布的 HTA 评估。欧洲 HTA 网络 (EUnetHTA) 将 LC(患者安全)和 OI 纳入其指南中。结果凸显出缺乏一致性。在叙述性综述中,对 10/149 篇已确定的文章进行了综述。大多数文章就 HTA 面临的挑战提出了建议,提出了解决 MD 特征不确定性的步骤,并报告了缺乏评估 MD 的方法指导。未将 MD 特征纳入 HTA 是几个重要因素的复杂相互作用。要使这些特征在未来成为多发性硬化症 HTA 的正式组成部分,需要有明确的指导和框架,以使制造商能够开发适当的证据,并使 HTA 从业人员能够更广泛地评估其影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics and Econometrics
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy. While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
期刊最新文献
Social Costs of Smoking in the Czech Republic. Economic Evaluations of Robotic-Assisted Surgery: Methods, Challenges and Opportunities. Onasemnogene Abeparvovec Gene Therapy and Risdiplam for the Treatment of Spinal Muscular Atrophy in Thailand: A Cost-Utility Analysis. The Impact of the Approach to Accounting for Age and Sex in Economic Models on Predicted Quality-Adjusted Life-Years. Measuring the Impact of Medical Cannabis Law Adoption on Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance Costs: A Difference-in-Difference Analysis, 2003–2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1