How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe : Better access to medicines through HTA.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q1 ECONOMICS European Journal of Health Economics Pub Date : 2024-08-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-02 DOI:10.1007/s10198-023-01637-z
Anna-Maria Fontrier, Bregtje Kamphuis, Panos Kanavos
{"title":"How can health technology assessment be improved to optimise access to medicines? Results from a Delphi study in Europe : Better access to medicines through HTA.","authors":"Anna-Maria Fontrier, Bregtje Kamphuis, Panos Kanavos","doi":"10.1007/s10198-023-01637-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Access to medicines is a shared goal across healthcare stakeholders. Since health technology assessment (HTA) informs funding decisions, it shapes access to medicines. Despite its wide implementation, significant access variations due to HTA are observed across Europe. This paper elicited the opinions of European stakeholders on how HTA can be improved to facilitate access.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A scoping review identified HTA features that influence access to medicines within markets and areas for improvement, while three access dimensions were identified (availability, affordability, timeliness). Using the Delphi method, we elicited the opinions of European stakeholders to validate the literature findings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nineteen participants from 14 countries participated in the Delphi panel. Thirteen HTA features that could be improved to optimise access to medicines in Europe were identified. Of these, 11 recorded a positive impact on at least one of the three access dimensions. HTA features had mostly a positive impact on timeliness and a less clear impact on affordability. 'Early scientific advice' and 'clarity in evidentiary requirements' showed a positive impact on all access dimensions. 'Established ways to deal with uncertainty during HTA' could improve medicines' availability and timeliness, while more 'reliance on real-world evidence' could expedite time to market access.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results reiterate that increased transparency during HTA and the decision-making processes is essential; the use of and reliance on new evidence generation such as real-world evidence can optimise the availability of medicines; and better collaborations between regulatory institutions within and between countries are paramount for better access to medicines.</p>","PeriodicalId":51416,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Economics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11283424/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Economics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10198-023-01637-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Access to medicines is a shared goal across healthcare stakeholders. Since health technology assessment (HTA) informs funding decisions, it shapes access to medicines. Despite its wide implementation, significant access variations due to HTA are observed across Europe. This paper elicited the opinions of European stakeholders on how HTA can be improved to facilitate access.

Methods: A scoping review identified HTA features that influence access to medicines within markets and areas for improvement, while three access dimensions were identified (availability, affordability, timeliness). Using the Delphi method, we elicited the opinions of European stakeholders to validate the literature findings.

Results: Nineteen participants from 14 countries participated in the Delphi panel. Thirteen HTA features that could be improved to optimise access to medicines in Europe were identified. Of these, 11 recorded a positive impact on at least one of the three access dimensions. HTA features had mostly a positive impact on timeliness and a less clear impact on affordability. 'Early scientific advice' and 'clarity in evidentiary requirements' showed a positive impact on all access dimensions. 'Established ways to deal with uncertainty during HTA' could improve medicines' availability and timeliness, while more 'reliance on real-world evidence' could expedite time to market access.

Conclusions: Our results reiterate that increased transparency during HTA and the decision-making processes is essential; the use of and reliance on new evidence generation such as real-world evidence can optimise the availability of medicines; and better collaborations between regulatory institutions within and between countries are paramount for better access to medicines.

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
如何改进卫生技术评估以优化药品获取?德尔福在欧洲的一项研究结果:通过HTA更好地获得药物。
引言:获得药品是医疗保健利益相关者的共同目标。由于卫生技术评估(HTA)为资金决策提供信息,它决定了药品的获取。尽管它的实施范围很广,但在整个欧洲都观察到由于HTA而导致的重大访问变化。本文就如何改进HTA以促进获取征求了欧洲利益相关者的意见。方法:范围界定审查确定了影响市场和改进领域内药品获取的HTA特征,同时确定了三个获取维度(可用性、可负担性和及时性)。使用德尔菲方法,我们征求了欧洲利益相关者的意见,以验证文献研究结果。结果:来自14个国家的19名参与者参加了德尔菲小组讨论。确定了13个可以改进的HTA功能,以优化欧洲药品的获取。其中,11个对三个访问维度中的至少一个维度产生了积极影响。HTA功能对及时性的影响大多是积极的,而对可负担性的影响则不那么明显早期的科学建议和“证据要求的明确性”对所有获取方面都产生了积极影响在HTA期间处理不确定性的既定方法“可以提高药品的可用性和及时性”,而更多地“依赖现实世界的证据”可以加快上市时间。结论:我们的研究结果重申,在HTA和决策过程中提高透明度至关重要;使用和依赖新的证据生成,如真实世界的证据,可以优化药物的可用性;国家内部和国家之间的监管机构之间更好的合作对于更好地获得药物至关重要。
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
CiteScore
6.10
自引率
2.30%
发文量
131
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Health Economics is a journal of Health Economics and associated disciplines. The growing demand for health economics and the introduction of new guidelines in various European countries were the motivation to generate a highly scientific and at the same time practice oriented journal considering the requirements of various health care systems in Europe. The international scientific board of opinion leaders guarantees high-quality, peer-reviewed publications as well as articles for pragmatic approaches in the field of health economics. We intend to cover all aspects of health economics: • Basics of health economic approaches and methods • Pharmacoeconomics • Health Care Systems • Pricing and Reimbursement Systems • Quality-of-Life-Studies The editors reserve the right to reject manuscripts that do not comply with the above-mentioned requirements. The author will be held responsible for false statements or for failure to fulfill the above-mentioned requirements. Officially cited as: Eur J Health Econ
期刊最新文献
Psychometric performance of EQ-5D-5L and SF-6Dv2 in patients with lymphoma in China. What remains after the money ends? Evidence on whether admission reductions continued following the largest health and social care integration programme in England. Measurement properties of the EQ-5D-3L, EQ-5D-5L, and SF-6Dv2 in patients with late-onset Pompe disease. The causal effect of early retirement on medication use across sex and occupation: evidence from Danish administrative data. Cost awareness among intensivists in their daily clinical practice: a prospective multicentre study.
×
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