The number of health technologies needing evaluation far outweighs available resources, and most Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies use criteria-based frameworks for topic prioritization (1,2). Despite variability, most frameworks include clinical, economic and budget impact. Some limitations of current frameworks lack mentioning of any explicit political/ethical deliberation and an evaluation on the potential impact of the HTAs (1).

During a topic prioritization for HTA, Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) as destination therapy for adults with end-stage heart failure was submitted. The prioritization criteria used were largely in line with those described above. We also included criteria on ethical/equity consideration and the potential impact of an HTA on decision making. A literature search was conducted to gather clinical and economic evidence on LVAD for the target population, supplemented by local data on potential need for and budget impact of providing a LVAD service.

LVAD was scored high on clinical, economic and budget impact with a moderately high need, which would generally subject it to an HTA in order to inform a policy decision. However LVAD was also considered as a technology with a high impact on ethical and political grounds, given that it is a technology offering survival and quality-of-life benefits for a small group of patients for whom effective treatment is otherwise lacking. Through deliberation, the prioritization panel concluded that the impact of an HTA would be low, as a policy decision on whether a LVAD program should be funded would go beyond evidence. Therefore an HTA was not recommended for LVAD.

To inform decision making, an evaluation on the potential impact of the HTA itself taking into account of the ethical/political consideration of funding a technology is of equal importance as the evidence alone. Subsequently, limited HTA resources can be reserved for technologies where an HTA can truly make a difference.