Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b95js Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T08:21:44.256Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Health Technology Assessment Implementation in Ukraine: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2019

Marcell Csanádi Open the ORCID record for Marcell Csanádi [Opens in a new window] ,
András Inotai ,
Oleksandra Oleshchuk ,
Oksana Lebega ,
Brodovskaya Alexandra ,
Oresta Piniazhko ,
Bertalan Németh  and
Zoltán Kaló
Marcell Csanádi*
Affiliation:
Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary Doctoral School of Pharmacological and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Pecs, Pécs, Hungary
András Inotai
Affiliation:
Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary Center for Health Technology Assessment, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
Oleksandra Oleshchuk
Affiliation:
Ternopil State Medical University, Ternopil, Ukraine National EML Committee, Kyiv, Ukraine
Oksana Lebega
Affiliation:
Department of Health Policy & Health Economics, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
Brodovskaya Alexandra
Affiliation:
Department of Health Policy & Health Economics, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary
Oresta Piniazhko
Affiliation:
National EML Committee, Kyiv, Ukraine Danylo Halytsky Lviv National Medical University, Lviv, Ukraine
Bertalan Németh
Affiliation:
Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary
Zoltán Kaló
Affiliation:
Syreon Research Institute, Budapest, Hungary Center for Health Technology Assessment, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary
*
Author for correspondence: Marcell Csanádi, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives

The need for improving healthcare decision making by implementing health technology assessment (HTA) has been a top priority in Ukraine since 2016. This study sought to provide a tailor-made HTA implementation roadmap, drawing on insights from national stakeholders.

Methods

We conducted a survey using a questionnaire already applied in previous HTA research. We assessed the status of HTA when reforms were initiated in 2016 and examined perspectives on possible future developments among policy makers and representatives of pharmaceutical companies and patient organizations.

Results

Thirty-two respondents answered the survey. Forty-eight percent of respondents were not aware of HTA training in Ukraine, but 91 percent preferred having either a graduate or postgraduate training. Experts stated that funding for HTA research and for critical appraisal of HTA submissions was limited, but in the future, they would increase funding mainly from public sources. A public HTA agency with academic support was the most preferred organizational structure. Eighty-eight percent of respondents opted for full transparency, making the HTA agency's recommendations and the related appraisal reports publicly available. A great majority of participants preferred mandating the use of local data in certain categories and indicated the importance of evaluating the transferability of international evidence. Healthcare priority and cost-effectiveness were the most important criteria for decisions, applied with a soft explicit threshold.

Conclusions

Ukraine is in the early phase of implementing HTA and our study provides a clear vision of national stakeholders about the future directions. In addition, learning from the experiences of other countries may help the implementation process.

Keywords

HTA implementationHTA roadmapPolicy surveyUkraineTransparency
Type
Policy
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , 2019 , pp. 393 - 400
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

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.)

Footnotes

The research project that was the basis of this manuscript was financially supported by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) Systems for Improved Access to Pharmaceuticals and Services (SIAPS). We acknowledge the valuable input from all stakeholders in Ukraine who completed the survey. The content of this publication reflects solely on the authors' views and authors take full responsibility for potential errors in the manuscript. All authors attest that (1) each author contributed to the conception and design or analysis and interpretation of data and the writing of the paper; (2) each has approved the version being submitted; and (3) the content has not been published nor is being considered for publication elsewhere.

References

1.Löblová, O (2018) What has health technology assessment ever done for us? J Health Serv Res Policy 23, 134–136.Google Scholar
2.Banta, D (2003) The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy 63, 121–132.Google Scholar
3.Oortwijn, W, Broos, P, Vondeling, H, et al. (2013) Mapping of health technology assessment in selected countries. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 29, 424–34.Google Scholar
4.Panteli, D, Eckhardt, H, Nolting, A, et al. (2015) From market access to patient access: overview of evidence-based approaches for the reimbursement and pricing of pharmaceuticals in 36 European countries. Health Res Policy Syst 13(39), 1–8.Google Scholar
5.Zawada, A, Mäkelä, M (2017) HTA in Central-Eastern-Southern Europe: Finding its way to health policy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 331–332.Google Scholar
6.Zaliska, O, Piniazhko, O, Maksymovych, N, Sichkoriz, O, Tolubaiev, V (2015) Pharmaceutical system in Ukraine: current and prospective issues. J Health Policy Outcomes Re 2, 88–94.Google Scholar
7.Zaliska, O, Piniazhko, O, Ilyk, R, Irynchyn, H (2017) Reimbursement and value assessment frameworks: ensuring patients’ access to asthma medicines in Ukraine. J Health Policy Outcomes Res 1, 43–47.Google Scholar
8.Piniazhko, O, Zaliska, O, Ilyk, R, Stasiv, Kh-O (2018) Pharmaceutical system in Ukraine: Implementation of external reference pricing, reimbursement programs and health technology assessment. Pharmacia 65, 28–39.Google Scholar
9.WHO (March 2015) Access to new medicines in Europe: technical review of policy initiatives and opportunities for collaboration and research. Available at: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/306179/Access-new-medicines-TR-PIO-collaboration-research.pdf?ua=1. Accessed March 07, 2019.Google Scholar
10.Ukrainian Ministry of Health. Order of the Ukrainian Ministry of Health #84: Regulation on National Essential Medicines List and Essential Medicines List Expert committee. Available at: http://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0258-16. Accessed November 20, 2018.Google Scholar
11.WHO Expert Committee on Selection and Use of Essential Medicines. How to develop a National Essential Medicines List. Agenda item: 18th Expert Committee on the Selection and Use of Essential Medicines. Available at: http://www.who.int/selection_medicines/committees/expert/18/How_to_developNEML_agenda_paper.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
12.Drummond, MF, Schwartz, JS, Jönsson, B, et al. (2008) Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 24, 244–258.Google Scholar
13.Management Sciences for Health (2017) EML Harmonization Process in Ukraine. Submitted to the US Agency for International Development by the Systems for Improved Access to Pharmaceuticals and Services (SIAPS) Program. Arlington, VA: Management Sciences for Health. Available at: http://apps.who.int/medicinedocs/documents/s23291en/s23291en.pdf. Accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
14.Allen, N, Liberti, L, Walker, SR, Salek, S (2017) A comparison of reimbursement recommendations by European HTA agencies: Is there opportunity for further alignment? Front Pharmacol 8(384), 1–14.Google Scholar
15.García-Mochón, L, Espín Balbino, J, et al. (2017) HTA and decision-making processes in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe: Results from a survey. Health Policy 123, 182–190.Google Scholar
16.Kaló, Z, Gheorghe, A, Huic, M, Csanádi, M, Kristensen, FB (2016) HTA implementation roadmap in Central and Eastern European countries. Health Econ 25, 179–92.Google Scholar
17.Németh, B, Csanádi, M, Kaló, Z (2017) Overview on the current implementation of health technology assessment in Hungary. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 333–338.Google Scholar
18.Rosselli, D, Quirland-Lazo, C, Csanádi, M, et al. (2017) HTA implementation in Latin American countries: comparison of current and preferred status. Value Health Reg Issues 14, 20–27.Google Scholar
19.Essential Medicines List for Ukraine. Available at: http://search.ligazakon.ua/l_doc2.nsf/link1/KP090333.html. Accessed 1, October 2018.Google Scholar
20.The law of Ukraine—Fundamentals of Ukrainian Health Law. Approved by Ukraine Parliament in 2017. Available at: http://zakon5.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2801-12. Accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
21.National Essential Medicines List Committee. Draft HTA Guideline published by the National Essential Medicines List Committee. Available at: http://www.nplz.org.ua/Applicants/Lists/AuxiliarySources/AllItems.aspx. Accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
22.National Essential Medicines List Committee. Publicly available HTA reports submitted to the National Essential Medicines List Committee. Available at: http://www.nplz.org.ua/Activity/Lists/InformationDrugs/AllItems.aspx. Accessed October 1, 2018.Google Scholar
23.Topachevskyi, O, Piniazhko, O, Lebega, O, Oleshchuk, O (2018) Estimation of supply side cost effectiveness threshold in Ukraine: perspective use in health care decision-making. Value Health 21, S100.Google Scholar
24.Huic, M, Tandara Hacek, R, Svajger, I (2017) Health technology assessment in Central, Eastern, and South European countries: Croatia. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 376–383.Google Scholar
25.Tesar, T, Hloska, A, Wawruch, M, et al. (2017) Introduction of health technology assessment for medicines in Slovakia. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 345–349.Google Scholar
26.Ozierański, P, Löblová, O, Nicholls, N, et al. (2018) Transparency in practice: evidence from ‘verification analyses’ issued by the Polish Agency for Health Technology Assessment in 2012–2015. Health Econ Policy Law 14, 182–204.Google Scholar
27.Benisheva-Dimitrova, T, Sidjimova, D, Cherneva, D, Kralimarkov, N (2017) Pricing, reimbursement, and health technology assessment of medicinal products in Bulgaria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 365–370.Google Scholar
28.Lipska, I, McAuslane, N, Leufkens, H, Hövels, A (2017) A decade of health technology assessment in Poland. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 350–357.Google Scholar
29.Scintee, SG, Ciutan, M (2017) Development of health technology assessment in Romania. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 33, 371–375.Google Scholar
30.Csanádi, M, Löblová, O, Ozierański, P, et al. (2018) When health technology assessment is confidential and experts have no power: the case of Hungary. Health Econ Policy Law 14, 162–181.Google Scholar