Health technology assessments (HTAs) have traditionally included clinical and cost-effectiveness evaluation of new health technologies (HTs). However, new HTs can generate important organizational impacts (OIs) that influence their overall value. OIs are currently not clearly identified and evaluated in HTA procedures and tools are limited. To address this issue, a comprehensive framework that allows to assess OIs of new HTs in HTAs is proposed.

A working and methodological group identified the Oslo Manual 2018, 4th edition, OECD/Eurostat, on the objectives and outcomes of commercial innovations as the basis for the OIs framework for HTAs. The Oslo Manual was translated to the healthcare sector and adapted to HTA procedures through a three-step process.

The framework is composed of three main parts. Part I tackles the context of the evaluation, Part II the categories of impacts and the specific impacts – in total, 16 OIs were identified – and Part III the stakeholders involved. The central part of the framework is Part II, and consists of three categories of impacts: (i) on the care process, (ii) on the stakeholders’ capabilities and skills, and (iii) on society or the community.

This framework provides a comprehensive and structured basis to document OIs of new HTs. It thus contributes to the extension of HTA evaluation criteria to other dimensions than clinical and economic aspects, that is, organizational aspects. Some of its intrinsic limitations and the questions they raise in the field for policy-makers, practitioners, and researchers are discussed.

The French health technology assessment (HTA) agency initiated a research between 2018 and 2019 with the aim of determining whether other HTA organizations (agencies, bodies, institutes, and expert networks) and researchers had developed an evaluation framework of organizational impacts (OIs).

Three types of investigation were carried out: (i) an analysis of documents published by selected HTA organizations, (ii) a rapid review on the OI issues, (iii) a questionnaire survey to experts of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment.

The analyses highlight six key points: (i) there is no explicit conceptual definition of OIs; (ii) OIs are often not included in a specific dimension of the evaluation or in the same dimensions; (iii) three recurring categories emerge from the assessment of OIs: processes, structure, and culture; (iv) despite its limitations, the European Network for Health Technology Assessment framework (Core Model) is the most mature assessment model to date; (v) the question of the scope of OIs to be considered is unresolved (micro-meso-macro); and (vi) the delineation between OI assessment and economic assessment must be addressed.

Although the issue of considering OI in HTA has been raised for many years, it remains largely unresolved. Defining the concept of OI is a prerequisite for taking the next step toward an evaluation framework. As the question of the impact of innovation goes beyond the health sector, extensive research on how to define and take into account these OIs may be relevant.

The ENT Scotland society (formerly known as the Scottish Otolaryngological Society) has two meetings a year and accepts oral presentations from trainees. This study aimed to identify publication rates from these meetings.

Abstracts of the presentations are published in The Journal of Laryngology and Otology. A structured search on PubMed and Google Scholar was undertaken to identify which presentations from the 2005 to 2014 meetings have been published.

Of the 145 abstracts found, 60.7 per cent were presenting clinical research and 44.1 per cent were related to the head and neck subspecialty. Seventy-three abstracts (50.3 per cent) were associated with publication as a peer-reviewed article; otology papers were more likely to be published than those focusing on other subspecialties (64.3 per cent, p = 0.036). No correlation was found between publication and other factors.

Presentations at the ENT Scotland meetings undergo unbiased peer review and are as likely to be published as those of other conferences.

The aim of this study was to describe the historical development of the HTAsiaLink network, draw lessons for other similar initiatives globally, and to analyze key determinants of its success and challenges for its future development.

This study is based on the collective and direct experiences of the founding members of the HTAsiaLink Network. Data were collected from presentations they made at various international forums and additional information was reviewed. Data analysis was done using the framework developed by San Martin-Rodriguez et al.

HTAsiaLink is a network of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in Asia established in 2011 with the aim of strengthening individual and institutional HTA capacity, reducing duplication and optimizing resources, transfer and sharing of HTA-related lessons among members, and beyond. During its 6 years, the network has expanded, initiating several capacity building activities and joint-research projects, raising awareness of the importance of HTA within the region and beyond, and gaining global recognition while establishing relationships with other global networks. The study identifies the determinants of success of the collaboration. The systemic factors include the favorable outlook toward HTA as an approach for healthcare priority setting in countries with UHC mandates. On organizational factors, the number of newly established HTA agencies in the region with similar needs for capacity building and peer-to-peer support was catalytic for the network development. The interactional aspects include ownership, trust, and team spirit among network members. The network, however, faces challenges notably, financial sustainability and management of the expanded network.

To describe approaches to recruitment, key challenges and strategies to improve recruitment among research organizations in the UK.

Recruiting research participants is challenging. Less than one-third of studies recruit to target on time.

Descriptive survey with 31 participants from 22 public and private sector organizations.

We identified a range of recruitment pathways, highlighting the extensive range of activities required throughout the process. Methods reported to improve recruitment were related to project management, context and resources. There were differences in emphasis between sectors concerning prioritization of staff roles, feasibility work and marketing.

Organizations involved in primary care research adopt diverse approaches, yet cross-fertilization between groups is limited

Previous research has shown that a preoperative assessment clinic enhances hospital cost-efficiency. However, the differences in organization of the patient flow have not been analysed. In this descriptive study, we evaluated the consequences of the organization of the patient flow of a preoperative assessment clinic on its performance, by analysing two Dutch university hospitals, which are organized essentially differently.

In the final analysis, the study included 880 patients who visited either academic centre. The performance of the two preoperative assessment clinics was evaluated by measuring patient flow time, various procedure times and the total waiting time. Patients’ age, ASA physical status and any preoperative tests requested by the physician were also recorded.

There was a significant difference in patient flow time between the two preoperative assessment clinics. More time was needed for the preoperative assessment when patients’ ASA class was higher. The patient flow time was longer when electrocardiogram and venepuncture were performed at the general outpatient laboratory than when they were performed at the preoperative assessment clinic due to longer waiting times. More tests were requested when they were performed at the preoperative assessment clinic.

This study shows that the organization of patient flow is an important aspect of the logistic processes of the preoperative assessment clinic. It might influence patient flow times as well as the number of preoperative tests requested. Together with other aspects of logistic performance, patient satisfaction and quality of medical assessment, patient flow logistics can be used to assess the quality of a preoperative assessment clinic.