The current capacity and future development of economic evaluation for policy decision-making: a survey among researchers and decision-makers in Thailand

Barriers and facilitators to conducting economic evaluation studies of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries: a survey of researchers

Background

The number of published economic evaluations of Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries is notably scarce. Limited local evidence could have a major impact on the implementation of economic evaluation recommendations in the decision-making process in GCC countries. Little is known about the factors affecting researchers who seek to conduct economic evaluations. Therefore, we aimed to assess researcher barriers and facilitators in conducting such studies of GCC countries.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey of health economic researchers working in GCC countries was conducted online between January and February 2020. The survey instrument collected researchers’ perceived barriers and facilitators and demographic information. For barriers, respondents rated their agreement on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”. For facilitators, respondents rated the importance of each facilitator on a six-point scale ranging from “extremely important” to “not very important”. Then, participants were asked to select the three most important barriers and facilitators from the lists. The data collected were examined using descriptive analysis.

Results

Fifty-one researchers completed the survey (37% response rate). The majority of participants (more than 80%) agreed that lack of quality of effectiveness data and restricted access to unit cost data are the main barriers to conducting economic research. Availability of relevant local data was reported as an important facilitator, followed by collaboration between health economic researchers, policy-makers and other stakeholders.

Conclusions

The results of this study provide an exploratory view of the issues faced by health economics researchers in GCC countries. Recommendations to GCC countries based on international experiences, such as to use real-world data in economic evaluation research, were provided.

Addressing Challenges in Health Technology Assessment Institutionalization for Furtherance of Universal Health Coverage Through South-South Knowledge Exchange: Lessons From Bhutan, Kenya, Thailand, and Zambia

Health Technology Assessment (HTA), a tool for priority setting, has emerged as a means of ensuring the sustainability of a Universal Health Coverage (UHC) system. However, setting up an effective HTA system poses multiple challenges and knowledge exchange can play a crucial role in helping countries achieve their UHC targets. This article reports the results of the discussion during a preconference session at the 2019 HTAsiaLink Conference, an annual gathering of HTA agencies in Asia, which supports knowledge transfer and exchange among HTA practitioners. As part of this discourse, 3 main HTA challenges were identified based on experiences of selected countries in Asia and Africa, namely Bhutan, Kenya, Thailand, and Zambia: availability of funding, building technical capacity, and achieving buy-in among stakeholders for successful translation of HTA research into UHC policy. The potential solutions identified through this South-South engagement included establishing a legal mandate for HTA, building local technical capacity through partnerships and enhancing strategic communication with stakeholders to increase awareness, among others. South-South Knowledge Exchange can therefore be instrumental in sharing lessons learned from common challenges and offer potential solutions to address capacity building initiatives for HTA in LMICs.

Health technology assessment and priority setting for universal health coverage: a qualitative study of stakeholders' capacity, needs, policy areas of demand and perspectives in Nigeria

INTRODUCTION

Health technology assessment (HTA) is an effective tool to support priority setting and generate evidence for decision making especially en route to achieving universal health coverage (UHC). We assessed the capacity needs, policy areas of demand, and perspectives of key stakeholders for evidence-informed decision making in Nigeria where HTA is still new.

METHODS

We surveyed 31 participants including decision makers, policy makers, academic researchers, civil society organizations, community-based organizations, development partners, health professional organizations. We revised an existing survey to qualitatively examine the need, policy areas of demand, and perspectives of stakeholders on HTA. We then analyzed responses and explored key themes.

RESULTS

Most respondents were associated with organizations that generated or facilitated health services research. Research institutes highlighted their ability to provide expertise and skills for HTA research but some respondents noted a lack of human capacity for HTA. HTA was considered an important and valuable priority-setting tool with a key role in the design of health benefits packages, clinical guideline development, and service improvement. Public health programs, medicines and vaccines were the three main technology types that would especially benefit from the application of HTA. The perceived availability and accessibility of suitable local data to support HTA varied widely but was mostly considered inadequate and limited. Respondents needed evidence on health system financing, health service provision, burden of disease and noted a need for training support in research methodology, HTA and data management.

CONCLUSION

The use of HTA by policymakers and communities in Nigeria is very limited mainly due to inadequate and insufficient capacity to produce and use HTA. Developing sustainable and institutionalized HTA systems requires in-country expertise and active participation from a range of stakeholders. Stakeholder participation in identifying HTA topics and conducting relevant research will enhance the use of HTA evidence produced for decision making. Therefore, the identified training needs for HTA and possible research topics should be considered a priority in establishing HTA for evidence-informed policy making for achieving UHC particularly among the most vulnerable people in Nigeria.

What do we need to know? Data sources to support evidence-based decisions using health technology assessment in Ghana

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based decision-making for prioritising health is assisted by health technology assessment (HTA) to integrate data on effectiveness, costs and equity to support transparent decisions. Ghana is moving towards universal health coverage, facilitated mainly by the National Health Insurance Scheme (NHIS) established in 2003. The Government of Ghana is committed to institutionalising HTA for priority-setting. We aimed to identify and describe the sources of accessible data to support HTA in Ghana.

METHODS

We identified and described data sources encompassing six main domains using an existing framework. The domains were epidemiology, clinical efficacy, costs, health service use and consumption, quality of life, and equity. We used existing knowledge, views of stakeholders, and searches of the literature and internet.

RESULTS

The data sources for each of the six domains vary in extent and quality. Ghana has several large data sources to support HTA (e.g. Demographic Health Surveys) that have rigorous quality assurance processes. Few accessible data sources were available for costs and resource utilisation. The NHIS is a potentially rich source of data on resource use and costs but there are some limits on access. There are some data on equity but data on quality of life are limited.

CONCLUSIONS

A small number of quality data sources are available in Ghana but there are some gaps with respect to HTA based on greater use of local and contextualised information. Although more data are becoming available for monitoring, challenges remain in terms of their usefulness for HTA, and some information may not be available in disaggregated form to enable specific analyses. We support recent initiatives for the routine collection of comprehensive and reliable data that is easily accessible for HTA users. A commitment to HTA will require concerted efforts to leverage existing data sources, for example, from the NHIS, and develop and maintain new data (e.g. local health utility estimates). It will be critical that an overarching strategic and mandatory approach to the collection and use of health information is developed for Ghana in parallel to, and informed by, the development of HTA approaches to support resource allocation decisions. The key to HTA is to use the best available data while being open about its limitations and the impact on uncertainty.

The knowledge and attitude of Ghanaian decision-makers and researchers towards health technology assessment

Although health technology assessment (HTA) is intended to provide policymakers with objective information, the likelihood that a health decision-maker (HDM) will use this information is associated with their knowledge, role and perception of the HTA process. In Ghana, policymakers are working towards formalising the use of HTA, but HDM knowledge of and attitude towards HTA are not known. Between March and May 2016, we conducted in-depth interviews and used inductive thematic analysis to explore Ghanaian HDMs (n = 23) and researchers' (n = 4) perceptions of and barriers to HTA and identify ways to promote HTA. We compare our findings with those reported in previous studies conducted in low-and-middle-income countries. Common themes were that resources, political and cultural factors act as barriers to HTA use. Recommendations made in previous studies which were also identified in this study included the need for the development of both human and data capacity, allocating funds to HTA and stakeholder involvement in HTA processes. Specific recommendations made by Ghanaian HDMs and researchers in this study focused on the establishment of an HTA body: its location, the constitution of the appraisal team, the type of evidence to appraise and who makes the final decision. The findings provide important information in the context of current planning to institutionalise HTA in Ghana. Addressing the identified barriers will enable policymakers to maximise the chances of realising the expected benefits of HTA, as participants who are potential producers and end-users are likely to use what they have contributed to.

Applying an Implementation Framework to the Use of Evidence from Economic Evaluations in Making Healthcare Decisions

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There is a need for the application of theory in understanding the use of evidence from economic evaluations in healthcare decision making. The purpose of this study is to review the published literature on the use of evidence from economic evaluations for healthcare decision making and to map the findings to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

METHODS

A systematic search strategy was used to identify studies investigating the factors that determine the use of evidence from economic evaluation in healthcare decision making. Barriers and facilitators identified in the included studies were mapped across the five CFIR domains, with the "intervention" referring to the use of economic evaluations in decision making. Gaps, inconsistencies and emergent relations were identified through the mapping process.

RESULTS

Fifty-three studies met eligibility criteria and were included in the review. The CFIR constructs associated with the Intervention Characteristics and those associated with the knowledge and beliefs of users of economic evaluations were widely cited in the identified barriers and facilitators. Other constructs from the CFIR had not been reported in the literature, such as 'organisational networks' and 'individual stage of change'. Most of the stages in the implementation process as described by the CFIR were reflected in the identified barriers and facilitators.

DISCUSSION

By categorising barriers and facilitators into domains, the CFIR provides a systematic approach to assess how these factors interact. Literature gaps in the literature regarding the use of economic evaluation in healthcare decision making were identified, specifically issues regarding organisational networks and the role of feedback.

CONCLUSIONS

Through mapping findings from studies of the use of evidence from economic evaluations in healthcare decision making, we present an implementation framework based on the CFIR for understanding the use of economic evaluations into practice.

From Design to Evaluation: Applications of Health Technology Assessment in Myanmar and Lessons for Low or Lower Middle-Income Countries

OBJECTIVES

Health technology assessment (HTA) has been widely used to inform coverage decisions in high-income countries over the past few decades and has been getting increasing attention in middle-income countries as a tool for healthcare decision making in recent years. This study aims to use the case of the Maternal and Child Health Voucher Scheme (MCHVS) in Myanmar to understand how HTA can have a policy impact in a low or lower middle-income country.

METHODS

The stages heuristic framework was used to describe the policy-making process. A document review was conducted and tacit knowledge of researchers involved was recorded.

RESULTS

The opportunity for a grant propelled maternal and child health to the policy agenda. An ex-ante HTA, which included a model-based health economic evaluation, informed the design of the scheme. The framework and key parameters from the ex-ante HTA were used for a mid-term review, which provided feedback to the policy implementation process. An ex-post HTA involved fielding a household survey to assess the impact of the scheme.

CONCLUSIONS

HTA can be a useful method for informing resource allocation throughout the policy process in low and lower middle-income settings where no formal mechanism for making coverage decisions exists.

Budgeting for a billion: applying health technology assessment (HTA) for universal health coverage in India

BACKGROUND

India recently launched the largest universal health coverage scheme in the world to address the gaps in providing healthcare to its population. Health technology assessment (HTA) has been recognised as a tool for setting priorities as the government seeks to increase public health expenditure. This study aims to understand the current situation for healthcare decision-making in India and deliberate on the opportunities for introducing HTA in the country.

METHODS

A paper-based questionnaire, adapted from a survey developed by the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI), was administered on the second day of the Topic Selection Workshop that was conducted as part of the HTA Awareness Raising Workshop held in New Delhi on 25-27 July, 2016. Participants were invited to respond to questions covering the need, demand and supply for HTA in their context as well as the role of their organisation vis-à-vis HTA. The response rate for the survey was about 68% with 41 participants having completed the survey.

RESULTS

Three quarters of the respondents (71%) stated that the government allocated healthcare resources on the basis of expert opinion. Most respondents indicated reimbursement of individual health technologies and designing a basic health benefit package (93% each) were important health policy areas while medical devices and screening programmes were cited as important technologies (98% and 92%, respectively). More than half of the respondents noted that relevant local data was either not available or was limited. Finally, technical capacity was seen as a strength and a constraint facing organisations.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study shed light on the current situation, the opportunities, including potential topics, and challenges in conducting HTA in India. There are limitations to the study and further studies may need to be conducted to inform the role that HTA will play in the design or implementation of universal health coverage in India.

Identification of publicly available data sources to inform the conduct of Health Technology Assessment in India

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) provides a globally-accepted and structured approach to synthesising evidence for cost and clinical effectiveness alongside ethical and equity considerations to inform evidence-based priorities. India is one of the most recent countries to formally commit to institutionalising HTA as an integral component of the heath resource allocation decision-making process. The effective conduct of HTA depends on the availability of reliable data.   Methods: We draw from our experience of collecting, synthesizing, and analysing health-related datasets in India and internationally, to highlight the complex requirements for undertaking HTA, and explore the availability of such data in India. We first outlined each of the core data components required for the conduct of HTA, and their availability in India, drawing attention to where data can be accessed, and different ways in which researchers can overcome the challenges of missing or low quality data. Results: We grouped data into the following categories: clinical efficacy; cost; epidemiology; quality of life; service use/consumption; and equity. We identified numerous large local data sources containing epidemiological information. There was a marked absence of other locally-collected data necessary for informing HTA, particularly data relating to cost, service use, and quality of life. Conclusions: The introduction of HTA into the health policy space in India provides an opportunity to comprehensively assess the availability and quality of health data capture across the country. While epidemiological information is routinely collected across India, other data inputs necessary for HTA are not readily available. This poses a significant bottleneck to the efficient generation and deployment of HTA into the health decision space. Overcoming these data gaps by strengthening the routine collection of comprehensive and verifiable health data will have important implications not only for embedding economic analyses into the priority setting process, but for strengthening the health system as a whole.

Identification of publicly available data sources to inform the conduct of Health Technology Assessment in India

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) provides a globally-accepted and structured approach to synthesising evidence for cost and clinical effectiveness alongside ethical and equity considerations to inform evidence-based priorities. India is one of the most recent countries to formally commit to institutionalising HTA as an integral component of the heath resource allocation decision-making process. The effective conduct of HTA depends on the availability of reliable data.   Methods: We draw from our experience of collecting, synthesizing, and analysing health-related datasets in India and internationally, to highlight the complex requirements for undertaking HTA, and explore the availability of such data in India. We first outlined each of the core data components required for the conduct of HTA, and their availability in India, drawing attention to where data can be accessed, and different ways in which researchers can overcome the challenges of missing or low quality data. Results: We grouped data into the following categories: clinical efficacy; cost; epidemiology; quality of life; service use/consumption; and equity. We identified numerous large local data sources containing epidemiological information. There was a marked absence of other locally-collected data necessary for informing HTA, particularly data relating to cost, service use, and quality of life. Conclusions: The introduction of HTA into the health policy space in India provides an opportunity to comprehensively assess the availability and quality of health data capture across the country. While epidemiological information is routinely collected across India, other data inputs necessary for HTA are not readily available. This poses a significant bottleneck to the efficient generation and deployment of HTA into the health decision space. Overcoming these data gaps by strengthening the routine collection of comprehensive and verifiable health data will have important implications not only for embedding economic analyses into the priority setting process, but for strengthening the health system as a whole.

The influence of cost-per-DALY information in health prioritisation and desirable features for a registry: a survey of health policy experts in Vietnam, India and Bangladesh

Background

Economic evaluation has been implemented to inform policy in many areas, including coverage decisions, technology pricing, and the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, there are barriers to evidence-based policy in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) that include limited stakeholder awareness, resources and data availability, as well as the lack of capacity to conduct country-specific economic evaluations. This study aims to survey health policy experts’ opinions on barriers to use of cost-effectiveness data in these settings and to obtain their advice on how to make a new cost-per-DALY database being developed by Tufts Medical Center more relevant to LMICs. It also identifies the factors influencing transferability.

Methods

In-depth interviews were conducted with 32 participants, including policymakers, technical advisors, and researchers in Health Ministries, universities and non-governmental organisations in Bangladesh, India (New Delhi, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka) and Vietnam.

Results

The survey revealed that, in all settings, the use of cost-effectiveness information in policy development is lacking, owing to limited knowledge among policymakers and inadequate human resources with health economics expertise in the government sector. Furthermore, researchers in universities do not have close connections with health authorities. In India and Vietnam, the demand for evidence to inform coverage decisions tends to increase as the countries are moving towards universal health coverage. The informants in all countries argue that cost-effectiveness data are useful for decision-makers; however, most of them do not perform data searches by themselves but rely on the information provided by the technical advisor counterparts. Most interviewees were familiar with using evidence from other countries and were also aware of the influences of contextual elements as a limitation of transferability. Finally, strategies to promote the newly developed database include training on basic economic evaluation for policymakers and researchers, and effective communication programs, with support from reputable global agencies.

Conclusions

Although cost-effectiveness information is recognised as essential in resource allocation, there are several impediments in the generation and use of such evidence to inform priority setting in LMICs. As such, the Cost-per-DALY database should be well-designed and introduced with appropriate promotion strategies so that it will be helpful in real-world policymaking.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0156-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The Use of Economic Evidence to Inform Drug Pricing Decisions in Jordan

BACKGROUND

Drug pricing is an example of a priority setting in a developing country with official requirements for the use of cost-effectiveness (CE) evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the role of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan.

METHODS

A prospective review of all applications submitted between November 2013 and May 2015 to the Jordan Food and Drug Association's drug pricing committee was carried out. All applications that involved requests for CE evidence were reviewed. Details on the type of study, the extent, and whether the evidence submitted was part of the formal deliberations were extracted and summarized.

RESULTS

The committee reviewed a total of 1608 drug pricing applications over the period of the study. CE evidence was requested in only 11 applications. The submitted evidence was of limited use to the committee due to concerns about quality, relevance of studies, and lack of pharmacoeconomic expertise. There were also no clear rules describing how CE would inform pricing decisions.

CONCLUSIONS

Limited local data and health economic experience were the main barriers to the use of economic evidence in drug pricing decisions in Jordan. In addition, there are no official rules describing the elements and process by which the CE evidence would inform drug pricing decisions. This study summarized accumulated observations for the current use of economic evaluations and evidence-based decision making in Jordan. Recommendations have been proposed to applicants and key decision makers to enhance the role of economic evidence in influencing health policies and evidence-based decision making across priority settings.

What Guidance are Economists Given on How to Present Economic Evaluations for Policymakers? A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review health economic guidelines for information on how to present health economic evaluations and consider implications for nontechnical audiences such as policymakers.

METHODS

Electronic databases and supplementary sources were searched for economic evaluation guidelines. Guidelines were critically appraised. Descriptive characteristics, standard formats, supports for nontechnical audiences, presentation approaches, and common reporting recommendations were extracted. Frequencies were tabulated and trends identified.

RESULTS

Thirty-one guidelines were included. Twenty-two guidelines include a standard reporting format with some sample tables and graphs. Common presentation approaches include well-cited tables of data sources, transparent model diagrams and descriptions, disaggregated results, and tabular and graphical displays of sensitivity analyses. Despite most guidelines being funded by policymakers, only five guidelines provided advice on presenting economic evaluations to noneconomists. However, 11 guidelines included a glossary of economic terminology for nontechnical readers. Common concepts that may require further explanation include differences in economic perspectives, appropriateness of time horizons, how economic outcomes such as quality-adjusted life-years relate to their component clinical outcomes, and choice of sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Health economists have consistent presentation formats and common reporting elements that should be considered when developing user-friendly explanations for general audiences. These overlap with policymakers' informational needs but may not be sufficient for understanding by nontechnical audiences. Developing presentation formats and tools that incorporate viewpoints of both economists and noneconomists will allow for better application of the results of economic evaluations and enhance the transparency and legitimacy of decision-making processes that are informed by economic evaluations.

Bridging the gap: exploring the barriers to using economic evidence in healthcare decision making and strategies for improving uptake

Evidence from economic evaluations is often not used to inform healthcare policy despite being well regarded by policy makers and physicians. This article employs the accessibility and acceptability framework to review the barriers to using evidence from economic evaluation in healthcare policy and the strategies used to overcome these barriers. Economic evaluations are often inaccessible to policymakers due to the absence of relevant economic evaluations, the time and cost required to conduct and interpret economic evaluations, and lack of expertise to evaluate quality and interpret results. Consistently reported factors that limit the translation of findings from economic evaluations into healthcare policy include poor quality of research informing economic evaluations, assumptions used in economic modelling, conflicts of interest, difficulties in transferring resources between sectors, negative attitudes to healthcare rationing, and the absence of equity considerations. Strategies to overcome these barriers have been suggested in the literature, including training, structured abstract databases, rapid evaluation, reporting checklists for journals, and considering factors other than cost effectiveness in economic evaluations, such as equity or budget impact. The factors that prevent or encourage decision makers to use evidence from economic evaluations have been identified, but the relative importance of these factors to decision makers is uncertain.

Priority setting for health in emerging markets

The use of health technology assessment research in emerging economies is becoming an increasingly important tool to determine the uses of health spending. As low- and middle-income countries' gross domestic product grows, the funding available for health has increased in tandem. There is growing evidence that comparative effectiveness research and cost-effectiveness can be used to improve health outcomes within a predefined financial space. The use of these evaluation tools, combined with a systematized process of priority setting, can help inform national and global health payers. This review of country institutions for health technology assessment illustrates two points: the efforts underway to use research to inform priorities are widespread and not confined to wealthier countries; and many countries' efforts to create evidence-based policy are incomplete and more country-specific research will be needed. Further evidence shows that there is scope to reduce these gaps and opportunity to support better incorporation of data through better-defined priority-setting processes.

Economic evaluation and the Jordan Rational Drug List: an exploratory study of national-level priority setting

OBJECTIVES

To explore the extent of and barriers to the use of economic evaluation in compiling the Jordan Rational Drug List in the health care system of Jordan.

METHODS

The research reported in this article involved a case study of the Jordan Rational Drug List. Data collection methods included semi-structured interviews with decision makers and analysis of secondary documentary sources. The case study was supplemented by additional interviews with a small number of Jordanian academics involved in the production of economic evaluation.

RESULTS

The research found that there was no formal requirement for cost-effectiveness information submitted as part of the decision-making process for the inclusion of new technologies on the Jordan Rational Drug List. Both decision makers and academics suggested that economic evidence was not influential in formulary decisions. This is unusual for national formulary bodies. The study identified a number of barriers that prevent substantive and routine use of economic evaluation. While some of these echo findings of previous studies, others-notably the extent to which the sectional interests of clinical groups and commercial (pharmaceutical) industry exert undue influence over decision making-more obviously result from the specific Jordanian context.

CONCLUSIONS

Economic evaluation was not found to be influential in the Jordan Rational Drug List. Recommendations for improvement include enhancing capacity in relation to generating, accessing, and/or applying health economic analysis to priority setting decisions. There is a further need to incentivize the use of economic evaluation, and this requires that organizational and structural impediments be removed.

Priority-setting institutions in health: recommendations from a center for global development working group

The rationing problem is common to all health systems-the challenge of managing finite resources to address unlimited demand for services. In most low- and middle-income countries, rationing occurs as an ad hoc, haphazard series of nontransparent choices that reflect the competing interests of governments, donors, and other stakeholders. Yet in a growing number of countries, more explicit processes, with strengths and limitations, are under development that merit better support. Against this background, the purpose of the Center for Global Development Working Group, which is to examine how priorities are set currently, and to propose institutional arrangements that promote country ownership and improve health outcomes by more systematically managing this complex process of politics and economics, is discussed. Current global and national priority-setting practices in low- and middle-income countries, the potential for strengthened national institutions, and increased global support are reviewed. Recommendations for action are provided.