Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment in Kazakhstan: 3 years’ experience of one unit

  • Andrey Avdeyev (a1) (a2), Adlet Tabarov (a1) (a3), Amir Akhetov (a1), Nasrulla Shanazarov (a1), David Hailey (a4), Aygul Kaptagayeva (a5), Liazzat Zhanabekova (a1), Aliya Gizatullina (a1) and Larissa Makalkina (a2)...

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to describe the development and activities of the Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA) Unit in the Hospital of the President's Affairs Administration, one of the first examples of the implementation of HB-HTA into the practice of Kazakhstani hospitals.

Methods

Details of the development of the Unit were obtained from the hospital's administrative records. The Unit's own records were used to describe the reports prepared and the clinical areas that were covered. Responses to recommendations in the Unit's reports were obtained from hospital administration and individual departments. Estimates of savings and payback periods were based on data from the hospital information system, and data submitted by manufacturers and distributors of medical equipment.

Results

Fifty-one rapid- and mini-HTA reports were prepared by the Unit from 2015 to 2017. Seventeen health technologies (33 percent) were not recommended for implementation in hospital practice. Refusal to implement sixteen of these technologies saved approximately 1,053,500 USD. Of the thirty-four recommended health technologies, twenty-four were implemented to treat or diagnose 1,376 patients, and eight others were included in plans for 2018–20. Of the twenty-four implemented health technologies, twelve did not require additional investments. The payback period of investments for the other twelve implemented technologies is not more than 3 years for six, less than 5 years for four, and more than 10 years for two technologies.

Conclusions

Establishment of the HB-HTA Unit in the hospital created the basis for making informed managerial decisions; identifying key directions for strategic development; and improving hospital management.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: Andrey Avdeyev, E-mail: avdeyev.andrey@yahoo.com

References

Hide All
1.HTAi Glossary. http://htaglossary.net/health+technology+assessment+%20%28HTA%29net/ (accessed November 15, 2018).
2.Sampietro-Colom, L, Lach, K, Cicchetti, A, et al. (2015) The AdHopHTA handbook: a handbook of hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HB -HTA); Public deliverable; The AdHopHTA Project (FP7/2007-13 grant agreement nr 305018). http://www.adhophta.eu/handbook (accessed November 15, 2018).
3.Kidholm, K, Ehlers, L, Korsbek, L, et al. (2009) Assessment of the quality of mini-HTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 25, 4248.
4.Cicchetti, A, Marchetti, M, Dibidino, R, Corio, M (2008) Hospital based health technology assessment world-wide survey. Hospital based health technology assessment Sub-Interest Group. Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi). https://www.htai.org/fileadmin/HTAi_Files/ISG/HospitalBasedHTA/2008Files/HospitalBasedHTAISGSurveyReport.pdf (accessed November 15, 2018).
5.Sampietro-Colom, L, Morilla-Bachs, I, Gutierrez-Moreno, S, Gallo, P (2012) Development and test of a decision support tool for hospital health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 28, 460465.
6.Martin, J Evidence in context: Hospital-based HTA adds significantly to Arms-Length HTA in Canada. Panel Session 28 – “Same, same but different”: HTA in and for Hospitals. HTAi 11th Annual Meeting, Washington. http://www.pthv.de/fileadmin/user_upload/PDF_Pflege/Vorlesungsunterlagen/Bruehl/HTAI_AbstractVolume_web1_S.147.pdf (accessed November 15, 2018).
7.Nielsen, CP, Funch, TM, Kristensen, FB (2011) Health technology assessment: Research trends and future priorities in Europe. J Health Serv Res Policy 16(Suppl 2), 615.
8.Sharip, B, Tabarov, A, Avdeyev, A, et al. (2017) Implementation of hospital-based Health Technology Assessment in the Republic of Kazakhstan (2 years' experience). ISPOR 22nd Annual International Meeting Research Abstracts. Value Health 20, A24A25.
9.Kosherbayeva, L, Hailey, D, Kurakbaev, K, et al. (2016) Implementation of health technology assessment work in a hospital in Kazakhstan. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 32, 7880.
10.Thokala, P, Duenas, A (2012) Multiple criteria decision analysis for health technology assessment. Value Health 15, 11721181.
11.Diaby, V, Goeree, R (2014) How to use multi-criteria decision analysis methods for reimbursement decision-making in healthcare: a step-by-step guide. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res 14, 8199.
12.Sussex, J, Rollet, P, Garau, M, et al. (2013) A pilot study of multicriteria decision analysis for valuing orphan medicines. Value Health 16:11631169.
13.Thokala, P, Devlin, N, Marsh, K, et al. (2016) Multiple criteria decision analysis for health care decision making - An introduction: Report of 1 the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 19, 113.
14.Marsh, K, IJzerman, M, Thokala, P, et al. (2016) Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis For Health Care Decision Making - Emerging good practices: Report 2 of the ISPOR MCDA Emerging Good Practices Task Force. Value Health 19, 125137.
15.Avdeyev, A, Tabarov, A, Kaptagayeva, A, Makalkina, L (2017) Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in the field of hospital-based health technology assessment. [Russian] Vestnik KazNMU 4, 10314.
16.Gagnon, MP, Abdeljelil, AB, Desmartis, M, et al. (2011) Opportunities to promote efficiency in hospital decision-making through the use of health technology assessment Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation.
17.Mitchell, MD, Williams, K, Brennan, PJ, Umscheid, CA (2010) Integrating local data into hospital-based healthcare technology assessment: Two case studies. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 26, 294300.
18.Demerdjian, G (2015) A 10-year hospital-based health technology assessment program in a public hospital in Argentina. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 31, 103110.
19.Ju, H, Hewson, K (2014) Health technology assessment and evidence-based policy making: Queensland Department of Health experience. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 30, 595600.
20.McGregor, M (2012) The impact of reports of The Technology Assessment Unit of the McGill University Health Centre. Montreal: McGill University Health Centre. https://www.mcgill.ca/tau/files/tau/muhc_tau_2012_65_impact_a.pdf (accessed November 15. 2018).
21.Poulin, P, Austen, L, Kortbeek, JB, et al. (2012) New technologies and surgical innovation: Five years of a local health technology assessment program in a surgical department. Surg Innov 19, 187199.
22.Bodeau-Livinec, F, Simon, E, Montagnier-Petrissans, C, et al. (2006) Impact of CEDIT recommendations: An example of health technology assessment in a hospital network. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 22, 161168.

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Avdeyev et al. supplementary material
Table S1

 Word (55 KB)
55 KB

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed