Systems to support health technology assessment (HTA) in Member States of the European Union with limited institutionalization of HTA

Formal Implementation of Cost-Effectiveness Evaluations in Japan: A Unique Health Technology Assessment System

In April 2019, Japan formally introduced health technology assessment (HTA) and, more specifically, a cost-effectiveness analysis, to inform healthcare decision making, mainly when it comes to the pricing of new technologies. This article provides an overview of this new policy, which was implemented formally after a pilot program. In the fiscal year (FY) 2012, discussions on cost-effectiveness assessments were initiated in Japan. After 7 years of deliberations, a cost-effectiveness assessment was implemented formally in April 2019. In Japan, the cost-effectiveness analysis has been used to inform price adjustments of healthcare technologies, although it has not yet been used for decision making on insurance coverage. Selection criteria were established because not all drugs and medical devices could be evaluated owing to a shortage of experts. Exclusion criteria have also been applied to prevent access restriction. The scope of the evaluation's price adjustment target is limited to part of the product price. If the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) threshold falls below ¥5 million per QALY, the price adjustment rate changes stepwise according to the cost per QALY. In addition to price reduction, a price-raising scheme has also been implemented for scenarios where products are evaluated to be highly cost-effective and innovative. This article describes the first formally implemented HTA system in Japan. Although it is too early to make any conclusions about its effect, the Japan-specific context makes this system unique. To fully understand the opportunities and challenges of the new system, it is vital that Japan accumulates experience with this system and develops human resources in health economic evaluation.

Comparing Use of Health Technology Assessment in Pharmaceutical Policy among Earlier and More Recent Adopters in the European Union

OBJECTIVES

To examine and compare the use of health technology assessment (HTA) for the reimbursement of new medicines in selected European Union member states with decades of experience in the use of HTA and in countries that have used it regularly since 2000.

METHODS

The selected countries were categorized into "earlier" adopters (group A: England, Germany, France, and Sweden) and more "recent" adopters (group B: Poland, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania). A systematic review of published literature was performed. The analysis and comparison of HTA procedures were done by using an analytical framework.

RESULTS

In all countries, the assessment criteria used include effectiveness, safety, relative effectiveness, and economic data. In group A countries, the main objectives are improving quality of care, ensuring equal access, and efficient use of resources. Group B countries have established HTA organizations with official guidelines but often seek the decisions of other developed countries. They place considerable emphasis on the budget impact of new therapies, and HTA is also used as a cost estimation tool for state budgets.

CONCLUSIONS

HTA organizations have been developed dynamically not only in high-income countries but also in countries with limited resources. The experience and evolution of both can be used by countries that are in the dawn of creating an HTA organization.

Who’s afraid of institutionalizing health technology assessment (HTA)?: Interests and policy positions on HTA in the Czech Republic

This article identifies the interests and policy positions of key health policy stakeholders regarding the creation of a health technology assessment (HTA) agency in the Czech Republic, and what considerations influenced them. Vested interests have been suggested as a factor mitigating the diffusion of HTA bodies internationally. The Czech Republic recently considered and discarded establishing an HTA agency, making it a good case for studying actors’ policy positions throughout the policy debates. Findings are based on in-depth, semi-structured expert and elite interviews with 34 key Czech health policy actors, supported by document analysis and extensive triangulation. Findings show that the HTA epistemic community of ‘aspiring agents’ was the only actor strongly in favor of an HTA body. Payers and the medical device and diagnostics industry were against it; patients and clinicians had no clear preferences. Original decision-makers were in favor but a new minister of health opted for a simpler policy alternative to solve his need for expertise. Existing institutions, policy alternatives and the institutional design of a future HTA body influence domestic actors’ preferences for or against an HTA agency. Domestic and international proponents of HTA should give serious thought to their concerns when advocating for HTA bodies.

New decision-making processes for the pricing of health technologies in Japan: The FY 2016/2017 pilot phase for the introduction of economic evaluations

Economic evaluation is used for decision-making processes in healthcare technologies in many developed countries. In Japan, no health economic data have been requested for drugs, medical devices, and interventions till date. However, economic evaluation is gradually gaining importance, and a trial implementation of the cost-effectiveness evaluation of drugs and medical devices has begun. Discussions on economic evaluation began in May 2012 within a newly established sub-committee of the Chuikyo, referred to as the "Special Committee on Cost Effectiveness." After four years of discussions, this committee determined that during the trial implementation, the results of the cost-effectiveness evaluation would be used for the re-pricing of drugs and medical devices at the end of fiscal year (FY) 2017. Chuikyo selected 13 products (7 drugs and 6 medical devices) as targets for this evaluation. These products will be evaluated until the end of FY 2017 based on the following process: manufacturers will submit the data of economic evaluation; the National Institute of Public Health will coordinate the review process; academic groups will perform the actual review of the submitted data, and the expert committee will appraise these data. This represents the first step to introducing cost-effectiveness analysis in the Japanese healthcare system. We believe that these efforts will contribute to the efficiency and sustainability of the Japanese healthcare system.

Mapping capacity to conduct health technology assessment in Central, Eastern and South-Eastern Europe

Aim

To provide insights into the capacity to conduct health technology assessment (HTA) in Central, Eastern, and South-Eastern Europe (CESEE), taking account of technical, financial, networking, and human resources.

Methods

An e-mail survey of 257 CESEE key informants involved in HTA was undertaken between March and April 2014. Contact e-mail addresses were identified from the internet. The survey questionnaire consisted of 3 sections: i) characteristics of the organization performing HTA, (ii) networking in HTA, and (iii) resources allocated for HTA.

Results

The survey was completed by 41 respondents representing a wide range of institutions from CESEE countries (response rate of 19.8%). Less than a quarter of respondents reported that their institutions had HTA-specific budgets, whereas the majority indicated that their institutions participated in HTA networks either at domestic or international levels. Although almost half of respondents indicated that their institutions offered HTA training, a shortage in skills training was suggested as the main barrier to HTA.

Conclusion

This is the first survey to thoroughly assess the state of HTA capacity in the CESEE region. To strengthen HTA capacity, CESEE countries should increase financial, technical, and training resources. To strengthen collaboration, the European Union and other international bodies should assist existing HTA networks in fulfilling their regional activities through leadership, advocacy to local policymakers, funding, and technical assistance.

GUIDING PRINCIPLES FOR GOOD PRACTICES IN HOSPITAL-BASED HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT UNITS

Objectives: Health technology assessment (HTA) carried out for policy decision making has well-established principles unlike hospital-based HTA (HB-HTA), which differs from the former in the context characteristics and ways of operation. This study proposes principles for good practices in HB-HTA units.

Methods: A framework for good practice criteria was built inspired by the EFQM excellence business model and information from six literature reviews, 107 face-to-face interviews, forty case studies, large-scale survey, focus group, Delphi survey, as well as local and international validation. In total, 385 people from twenty countries have participated in defining the principles for good practices in HB-HTA units.

Results: Fifteen guiding principles for good practices in HB-HTA units are grouped in four dimensions. Dimension 1 deals with principles of the assessment process aimed at providing contextualized information for hospital decision makers. Dimension 2 describes leadership, strategy and partnerships of HB-HTA units which govern and facilitate the assessment process. Dimension 3 focuses on adequate resources that ensure the operation of HB-HTA units. Dimension 4 deals with measuring the short- and long-term impact of the overall performance of HB-HTA units. Finally, nine core guiding principles were selected as essential requirements for HB-HTA units based on the expertise of the HB-HTA units participating in the project.

Conclusions: Guiding principles for good practices set up a benchmark for HB-HTA because they represent the ideal performance of HB-HTA units; nevertheless, when performing HTA at hospital level, context also matters; therefore, they should be adapted to ensure their applicability in the local context.

Three worlds of health technology assessment: explaining patterns of diffusion of HTA agencies in Europe

In the past two decades, setting up independent health technology assessment (HTA) agencies has become a popular tool to inform reimbursement decision-making in health care, spreading from Northern European countries across Western Europe but much less so to post-communist countries. Structural political science explanations leave gaps in clarifying this diffusion pattern. This paper proposes a theoretical model focusing on the influence of domestic epistemic communities mitigating policy diffusion. Based on a review of HTA institutions in the EU, it proposes a chronological taxonomy of HTA agencies in Europe (the forerunners, the mainstreamers and the non-adopters) and asks why there is such an important East-West divide. The paper discusses theoretical explanations from different literatures, finding unsatisfactory many traditional political science answers such as the degree of centralization of a country's health system, its financial organization (Bismarckian or Beveridgian), the attitude toward independent regulatory bodies in general, the influence of international actors, or lack of resources. Finally, it suggests cases for empirical testing of the domestic epistemic communities model.

Health technology assessment: Research trends and future priorities in Europe

Objective:

To provide an overview of health services research related to health technology assessment (HTA) and to identify research priorities from a European perspective.

Methods:

Several methods were used: systematic review of articles indexed with the MeSH term ‘technology assessment’ in PubMed from February 1999-2009; online survey among experts; and conference workshop discussions.

Results:

Research activity in HTA varies considerably across Europe. The research was categorised into six areas: (1) the breadth of analysis in HTA (such as economic, organizational and social aspects); (2) HTA products developed to meet the needs of policy-makers (such as horizon scanning, mini-HTA, and core HTA); (3) handling life-cycle perspectives in relation to technologies; (4) topics that challenge existing methods and for which HTA should be developed to address the themes more comprehensively (such as public health interventions and organizational interventions); (5) development of HTA capacity and programmes; and (6) links between policy and HTA. An online survey showed that the three areas that were given priority were the relationship between HTA and policy-making (71%), the impact of HTA (62%) and incorporating patient aspects in HTA (50%). Policy-makers highlighted HTA and innovation processes as their main research priority (42%). Areas that the systematic review identified as future priorities include issues within the six existing research areas such as disinvestment, developing evidence for new technologies, assessing the wider effects of technology use, and determining how HTA affects decision-making. In addition, relative effectiveness and individualized treatments are areas of growing interest.

Conclusions:

The research priorities identified are important for obtaining high quality and cost-effective health care in Europe. Managing the introduction, use and phasing out of technologies challenges health services throughout Europe, and these processes need to be improved to successfully manage future more general challenges. An ageing population and a diminishing workforce both require strong efforts to ensure effective and well-organized use of human resources and technologies. Furthermore, Europe needs to focus on innovation. This is closely linked to use of technologies and calls for future research.

Practical tools and methods for health technology assessment in Europe: Structures, methodologies, and tools developed by the European network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA

Objectives: This article presents an overview of the practical methods and tools to support transnational Health Technology Assessment (HTA) that were developed and pilot tested by the European network for HTA (EUnetHTA), which involved a total of sixty-four Partner organizations.

Methods: The methods differ according to scope and purpose of each of the tools developed. They included, for example, literature reviews, surveys, Delphi and consensus methods, workshops, pilot tests, and internal/public consultation.

Results: Practical results include an HTA Core Model and a Handbook on the use of the model, two pilot examples of HTA core information, an HTA Adaptation Toolkit for taking existing reports into new settings, a book about HTA and health policy making in Europe, a newsletter providing structured information about emerging/new technologies, an interactive Web-based tool to share information about monitoring activities for emerging/new technologies, and a Handbook on HTA capacity building for Member States with limited institutionalization of HTA.

Conclusions: The tools provide high-quality information and methodological frameworks for HTA that facilitate preparation of HTA documentation, and sharing of information in and across national or regional systems. The tools will be used and further tested by partners in the EUnetHTA Collaboration aiming to (i) help reduce unnecessary duplication of HTA activities, (ii) develop and promote good practice in HTA methods and processes, (iii) share what can be shared, (iv) facilitate local adaptation of HTA information, (v) improve the links between health policy and HTA.