Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T06:18:40.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

EMERGENCE OF “DRIVERS” FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2016

Hector Eduardo Castro Jaramillo ,
Ornella Moreno-Mattar  and
Diana Osorio-Cuevas
Hector Eduardo Castro Jaramillo
Affiliation:
T.H. Chan Harvard School of Public Health, Global Health & Population, Bogotá, Colombia
Ornella Moreno-Mattar
Affiliation:
Universidad Externado de Colombia, Bogotá, [email protected]
Diana Osorio-Cuevas
Affiliation:
Institute for Health Technology Assessment (IETS - Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud), Bogotá, Colombia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) examines the consequences of the application of health technologies and is aimed at better informing decision-makers. Over the past 30 years, different countries have implemented HTA organizations. Colombia established by law its own HTA agency (IETS) in 2011 which started operations in November 2012. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of conducting and using HTA to inform decision-making in this context. Through a qualitative approach, ten “drivers” emerged with the ability to help or hinder HTA development in this context: availability and quality of data, implementation strategy, cultural aspects, local capacity, financial support, policy/political support, globalization, stakeholder pressure, health system context, and usefulness perception.

Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with key HTA researchers, after following rigorous transcription, and thematic content analysis, those aspects that may be barriers or facilitator for HTA development and use in Colombia were identified.

Results: Although HTA has become a tool to inform decision-making around the world, its use may vary according to setting. Determining those aspects which may enable or interfere with HTA development and use in Colombia may be useful for other countries when considering the establishment of HTA systems.

Conclusions: The conceptual transferability of concepts like “drivers” with caveats may be of interest for similar settings trying to incorporate HTA processes and institutions into systematic decision-making.

Keywords

Health policyDecision-makingAssessment
Type
Policies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , 2016 , pp. 300 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

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. O'Donnell, JC, Sissi, V, Pashos, CL, Miller, DW, Smith, MD. Health technology assessment: Lessons learned from around the world–An Overview. Value Health. 2009;12:1098–2015.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2. Morrison, DS, Batty, GD. The advantages of being called NICE: A systematic review of journal articles using the acronym for the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. J Public Health. 2009;31:30.Google Scholar
3. Bulfone, L, Younie, S, Carter, R. Health technology assessment: Reflections from the antipodes. Value Health. 2009;12:1–5.Google Scholar
4. Castro, HE. Health technology assessment across borders and the role of NICE and NICE international on spreading the message on evidence based health policies. Organisational Policy Analysis Report (DrPH), London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine; 2011.Google Scholar
5. Castro, HE. Agencias de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias: ¿Moda o Necesidad?. Revista Via SALUD-Centro de Gestión Hospitalaria. 2012;16:12–17.Google Scholar
6. Drummond, M, Weatherly, H. Implementing the findings of health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2000;16:1–12.Google Scholar
7. Rajan, A, Gutierrez-Ibarluzea, I, Moharra, M. Addressing issues in health technology assessment promotion: Motives, enablers, and barriers. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:55–63.Google Scholar
8. Simon, HA. Administrative behaviour, 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan; 1957.Google Scholar
9. Buse, K, Mays, N, Walt, G. Making health policy, 2nd ed. England: Open University Press; 2010.Google Scholar
10. Lindblom, CE. The science of muddling through. Public Admin Rev. 1959;19:79–88.Google Scholar
11. Drummond, MF, Schwartz, JS, Jonsson, B, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource-allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:244–258.Google Scholar
12. Chalkidou, K, Tunis, S, Lopert, R, et al. Comparative effectiveness research and evidence-based health policy: Experience from four countries. Milbank Q. 2009;87:339–367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Pichon-Riviere, A, Augustovski, F, Rubinstein, A, et al. Health technology assessment for resource-allocation decisions: Are key principles relevant for Latin America? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26:421–427.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14. Grbich, C. Qualitative research in health: An introduction. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1999.Google Scholar
15. Green, J, Thorogood, N. Qualitative methods for health research, 2nd ed. London: SAGE Publications; 2009.Google Scholar
16. Crookes, P, Davies, S, eds. Research into practice: Essential skills for reading and applying research. London: Ballière Tindall, in association with the RCN; 1998.Google Scholar
17. Britten, N. Qualitative interviews in medical research. BMJ. 1995;311:251–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18. Braun, V, Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:77–101.Google Scholar
19. Krueger, R, Casey, MA (2002). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2002.Google Scholar
20. Caballero-Uribe, CV. La crisis del sector salud. Salud Uninorte. 2012;28:7–12.Google Scholar
21. Defensoría del Pueblo. Bogotá, Colombia; 2013. http://www.defensoria.org.co/red/anexos/publicaciones/tutelaDerechoSalud2012.pdf (accessed September 30, 2013).Google Scholar
22. Varela-Lema, L, Merino, GA, Garcia, ML, et al. Requirements for and expectations of health technology assessment in Galicia (Spain): A qualitative study from the perspective of decision-makers and clinicians. <Demandas y expectativas de la evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias en Galicia. Analisis cualitativo desde la perspectiva de decisores y clínicos>. Gac Sanit. 2011;25:454–460.Google Scholar
23. Silva, ML, Spath, HM, Moumjid, NF. The use of economic evaluations in decision-making at macro level: A literature review- Conference: ISPOR 13th Annual European Congress Prague Czech Republic. Value Health. 2010;13:A248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
24. Hyder, A, Corluka, A, Winch, P, et al. National policy-makers speak out: Are researchers giving them what they need?. Health Policy Plann. 2011;26:73–82.Google Scholar
25. Pichon-Riviere, A, Ceballos, RM, Briones, E. Health technology assessment in Latin-America and the Caribbean, facilitators and barriers for international collaboration: A survey- ISPOR 12th Annual European Congress Paris France. Conference. Value Health. 2009;12:A488.Google Scholar