Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T21:24:40.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

BRAZILIAN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT BULLETIN: EDITORIAL PROCESS, DISSEMINATION STRATEGIES, CRITICAL APPRAISAL, AND INITIAL IMPACT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 January 2012

Marcus Tolentino Silva ,
Rosimary Terezinha de Almeida ,
Cintia Maria Gava ,
Taís Freire Galvão ,
Edina Mariko Koga da Silva ,
Vania Cristina Canuto Santos ,
Misani Akiko Kanamota Ronchini ,
Aline Monte de Mesquita ,
Flávia Tavares Silva Elias  and
Alexandre Lemgruber Portugal d'Oliveira
...Show all authors
Marcus Tolentino Silva
Affiliation:
Ministry of Health of [email protected]
Rosimary Terezinha de Almeida
Affiliation:
Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
Cintia Maria Gava
Affiliation:
Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency
Taís Freire Galvão
Affiliation:
University of Brasilia
Edina Mariko Koga da Silva
Affiliation:
Federal University of São Paulo
Vania Cristina Canuto Santos
Affiliation:
Ministry of Health of Brazil
Misani Akiko Kanamota Ronchini
Affiliation:
Brazilian Health Surveillance Agency
Aline Monte de Mesquita
Affiliation:
National Agency for Supplementary Health
Flávia Tavares Silva Elias
Affiliation:
Ministry of Health of Brazil
Alexandre Lemgruber Portugal d'Oliveira
Affiliation:
Panamerican Health Organization
Álvaro Nagib Atallah
Affiliation:
Federal University of São Paulo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: This study reports on the Brazilian experience of developing a specialized bulletin, the Brazilian Health Technology Assessment Bulletin (BRATS), on health technology assessments (HTA).

Methods: The editorial process, format, and dissemination strategy of the publication are presented. A critical appraisal of the available issues was made using the checklist for HTA reports of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. The initial impact was estimated based on a retrospective observational measurement of the types of publications that cite the bulletin as a source of information. The publications citing BRATS were identified using Google Scholar.

Results: Since June 2008, fourteen issues of the bulletin have been produced. BRATS has not presented any significant limitation that would compromise generalizations of its results within the Brazilian context. The initial impact of the bulletin, however, has been small, which may be due to its exclusively electronic dissemination format and technical language. We found nine publications citing BRATS in Google Scholar.

Conclusions: It is hoped that the bulletin will promote the continuity of HTA actions among health-sector managers and professionals in Brazil.

Keywords

Biomedical technology assessmentTechnical reportBrazil
Type
METHODS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 2012 , pp. 65 - 69
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Atallah, AN. Evidence-based health technology assessments for the Brazilian National Health System (Sistema Único de Saúde, SUS) and for all. Sao Paulo Med J. 2009;127:59–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Atallah, AN. Sources of evidence. Sao Paulo Med J. 2008;126:73–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Athaydes, GA, Heineck, I, Lopes, EC. Análise de custos envolvendo medicamentos antes e após a cirurgia bariátrica. Porto Alegre: UFRGS; 2010.Google Scholar
4.Bahia. Secretaria da Administração. Protocolo Clínico e Diretrizes Terapêuticas para Tratamento da Degeneração Macular relacionada a Idade – DMRI. 1st ed. Salvador: SAEB/CGPS; 2009.Google Scholar
5.Banta, D, Almeira, RT. The development of health technology assessment in Brazil. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25 (Suppl 1):255–259.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Battista, RN, Hodge, MJ. The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: Reflections for the millennium. CMAJ. 1999;160:1464–1467.Google ScholarPubMed
7.Brasil. Conselho Nacional de Secretários de Saúde. Relatório do Seminário Internacional de Assistência Farmacêutica do CONASS, realizado em 15 e 16 de junto de 2009, em Brasília/DF. Brasília: CONASS; 2010.Google Scholar
8.Brazilian Institute of Public Opinion and Statistics (IBOPE). The Nielsen Company. NetView. São Paulo: IBOPE Nielsen Online; 2010.Google Scholar
9.Bueno, RLP.A decisão de incorporação de tecnologias em saúde no SUS: A questão dos medicamentos. Porto Alegre: UFRGS; 2010.Google Scholar
10.Chamié, D, Abizaid, A. Stent Cronus: Chegou o momento de adotarmos um stent nacional? Rev Bras Cardiol Invas. 2009;17:300–304.Google Scholar
11.Eisenberg, JM. Ten lessons for evidence-based technology assessment. JAMA. 1999;282:1865–1869.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Fattal, J, Lehoux, P. Health technology assessment use and dissemination by patient and consumer groups: Why and how? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:473–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Goodman, C.HTA 101: Introduction to health technology assessment. Bethesda, MD: National Library of Medicine, National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology; 2004.Google Scholar
14.Guioti, CO, Sander, GB, Araújo, MAM, Ronchini, MAK, Picon, PD, Santos, VCC. Boletim brasileiro de avaliação de tecnologias em saúde: Entecavir para o tratamento da hepatite B crônica. BRATS. 2006;1:1–6.Google Scholar
15.Hailey, D. Toward transparency in health technology assessment: A checklist for HTA reports. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19:1–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Hanney, S, Buxton, M, Green, C, Coulson, D, Raftery, J. An assessment of the impact of the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme. Health Technol Assess. 2007;11: iii–iv, ix–xi, 1–180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.International Society of Drug Bulletins. World Health Organization. Starting or strengthening a drug bulletin: A practical manual. Geneva: ISDB/WHO; 2005.Google Scholar
18.Kuruvilla, S, Mays, N, Pleasant, A, Walt, G. Describing the impact of health research: A Research Impact Framework. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:134.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Lehoux, P, Tailliez, S, Denis, JL, Hivon, M. Redefining health technology assessment in Canada: Diversification of products and contextualization of findings. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:325–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Nita, ME, Mantilla, P, Rahal, E, Araújo, ESA. Princípios da farmacoeconomia (FE) e análise farmacoeconômica do entecavir versus lamivudina em pacientes com hepatite B crônica no Brasil. In: Araújo, ESA. aBc das hepatites: Manual clínico para o manuseio, terapia e prevenção da hepatite B. São Paulo: Bristol-Myers Squibb; 2008.Google Scholar
21.Sancho, LG, Vargens, JMC. Health economic evaluation in a local level government health care system. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva. 2009;14 (Suppl 1):1513–1521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Silva, MT. Sistema Único de Salud: La experiencia brasileña en la universalización del acceso a la salud. Rev Peru Med Exp Salud Publica. 2009;26:251–257.Google Scholar
23.Watt, A, Cameron, A, Sturm, L, et al. Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: An inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:133–139.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed