Andrea Alcaraz, Emiliano Navarro, Verónica Alfie, Lucas Perelli, Sebastián García Martí, Agustín Ciapponi, Ariel Bardach, Andrés Pichon-Riviere, Federico Augustovski
{"title":"阿根廷快速卫生技术评估利益相关者磋商程序的设计与实施。","authors":"Andrea Alcaraz, Emiliano Navarro, Verónica Alfie, Lucas Perelli, Sebastián García Martí, Agustín Ciapponi, Ariel Bardach, Andrés Pichon-Riviere, Federico Augustovski","doi":"10.1016/j.arcmed.2024.103093","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Health technology assessment (HTA) is a standardized methodology that allows the assessment technologies’ value. By incorporating the perspective of stakeholders in a public consultation process, transparency and quality of decisions can be improved.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To describe the active stakeholder consultation process for rapid HTAs in an Argentinean, independent, academic, non-profit HTA agency, assessing its initial five years.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Since 2017, we have been conducting an active public consultation process for rapid HTA documents, inviting producers, healthcare professionals, and patient organizations to provide comments, and their input may lead to changes in the HTA documents. Changes were classified as major (changes to the coverage recommendation), intermediate (changes in efficacy, net benefit, or cost-effectiveness that did not change coverage recommendations), and minor modifications (other changes).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From May 2017–August 2022, 308 rapid HTA (rHTA) reports were published, and 3,438 invitations were sent. 140 rHTA (45.5%) received a total of 228 comments. Comments came from producers in 53% (<em>n</em> = 112) and healthcare professional organizations in 31.2% (<em>n</em> = 66). Technologies evaluated were drugs in 37% (<em>n</em> = 114), procedures in 35.5% (<em>n</em> = 109), diagnostic methods in 15.3% (<em>n</em> = 47), and devices in 12.2% (<em>n</em> = 38). Out of 308 rHTA documents, 120 (39%) were modified—mostly minor adjustments (<em>n</em> = 100; 80%), followed by major (<em>n</em> = 12; 10%) and intermediate modifications (<em>n</em> = 8; 6.4%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Implementing an active stakeholder involvement process in HTA is feasible in a low- to middle-income country context and strengthens and improves the HTA process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8318,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Medical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Design and implementation of a stakeholder consultation process for rapid health technology assessments in Argentina\",\"authors\":\"Andrea Alcaraz, Emiliano Navarro, Verónica Alfie, Lucas Perelli, Sebastián García Martí, Agustín Ciapponi, Ariel Bardach, Andrés Pichon-Riviere, Federico Augustovski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arcmed.2024.103093\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><div>Health technology assessment (HTA) is a standardized methodology that allows the assessment technologies’ value. By incorporating the perspective of stakeholders in a public consultation process, transparency and quality of decisions can be improved.</div></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To describe the active stakeholder consultation process for rapid HTAs in an Argentinean, independent, academic, non-profit HTA agency, assessing its initial five years.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Since 2017, we have been conducting an active public consultation process for rapid HTA documents, inviting producers, healthcare professionals, and patient organizations to provide comments, and their input may lead to changes in the HTA documents. Changes were classified as major (changes to the coverage recommendation), intermediate (changes in efficacy, net benefit, or cost-effectiveness that did not change coverage recommendations), and minor modifications (other changes).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>From May 2017–August 2022, 308 rapid HTA (rHTA) reports were published, and 3,438 invitations were sent. 140 rHTA (45.5%) received a total of 228 comments. Comments came from producers in 53% (<em>n</em> = 112) and healthcare professional organizations in 31.2% (<em>n</em> = 66). Technologies evaluated were drugs in 37% (<em>n</em> = 114), procedures in 35.5% (<em>n</em> = 109), diagnostic methods in 15.3% (<em>n</em> = 47), and devices in 12.2% (<em>n</em> = 38). Out of 308 rHTA documents, 120 (39%) were modified—mostly minor adjustments (<em>n</em> = 100; 80%), followed by major (<em>n</em> = 12; 10%) and intermediate modifications (<em>n</em> = 8; 6.4%).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Implementing an active stakeholder involvement process in HTA is feasible in a low- to middle-income country context and strengthens and improves the HTA process.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Medical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Medical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188440924001425\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0188440924001425","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Design and implementation of a stakeholder consultation process for rapid health technology assessments in Argentina
Introduction
Health technology assessment (HTA) is a standardized methodology that allows the assessment technologies’ value. By incorporating the perspective of stakeholders in a public consultation process, transparency and quality of decisions can be improved.
Objective
To describe the active stakeholder consultation process for rapid HTAs in an Argentinean, independent, academic, non-profit HTA agency, assessing its initial five years.
Methods
Since 2017, we have been conducting an active public consultation process for rapid HTA documents, inviting producers, healthcare professionals, and patient organizations to provide comments, and their input may lead to changes in the HTA documents. Changes were classified as major (changes to the coverage recommendation), intermediate (changes in efficacy, net benefit, or cost-effectiveness that did not change coverage recommendations), and minor modifications (other changes).
Results
From May 2017–August 2022, 308 rapid HTA (rHTA) reports were published, and 3,438 invitations were sent. 140 rHTA (45.5%) received a total of 228 comments. Comments came from producers in 53% (n = 112) and healthcare professional organizations in 31.2% (n = 66). Technologies evaluated were drugs in 37% (n = 114), procedures in 35.5% (n = 109), diagnostic methods in 15.3% (n = 47), and devices in 12.2% (n = 38). Out of 308 rHTA documents, 120 (39%) were modified—mostly minor adjustments (n = 100; 80%), followed by major (n = 12; 10%) and intermediate modifications (n = 8; 6.4%).
Conclusion
Implementing an active stakeholder involvement process in HTA is feasible in a low- to middle-income country context and strengthens and improves the HTA process.
期刊介绍:
Archives of Medical Research serves as a platform for publishing original peer-reviewed medical research, aiming to bridge gaps created by medical specialization. The journal covers three main categories - biomedical, clinical, and epidemiological contributions, along with review articles and preliminary communications. With an international scope, it presents the study of diseases from diverse perspectives, offering the medical community original investigations ranging from molecular biology to clinical epidemiology in a single publication.