Describing our institution’s off-label use of gabapentin to treat irritability after superior cavopulmonary connection surgery and its impact on subsequent opiate and benzodiazepine requirements.

This is a single-center retrospective cohort study including infants who underwent superior cavopulmonary connection operation between 2011 and 2019.

Gabapentin was administered in 74 subjects (74/323, 22.9%) during the observation period, with a median (IQR) starting dose of 5.7 (3.3, 15.0) mg/kg/day and a maximum dose of 10.7 (5.5, 23.4) mg/kg/day. Infants who underwent surgery in 2015–19 were more likely to receive gabapentin compared with those who underwent surgery in 2011–14 (p < 0.0001). Infants prescribed gabapentin were younger at surgery (137 versus 146 days, p = 0.007) and had longer chest tube durations (1.8 versus 0.9 days, p < 0.001), as well as longer postoperative intensive care (5.8 versus 3.1 days, p < 0.0001) and hospital (11.5 versus 7.0 days, p < 0.0001) lengths of stays. The year of surgery was the only predisposing factor associated with gabapentin administration in multivariate analysis. In adjusted linear regression, infants prescribed gabapentin on postoperative day 0–4 (n = 64) had reduced benzodiazepine exposure in the following 3 days (−0.29 mg/kg, 95% CI −0.52 – −0.06, p = 0.01) compared with those not prescribed gabapentin, while no difference was seen in opioid exposure (p = 0.59).

Gabapentin was used with increasing frequency during the study period. There was a modest reduction in benzodiazepine requirements associated with gabapentin administration and no reduction in opioid requirements. A randomised controlled trial could better assess gabapentin’s benefits postoperatively in children with congenital heart disease.

Patients are increasingly involved in the decision-making process for health technology assessment (HTA), but the question of at what stage they can be involved is still controversial. In Kazakhstan, the HTA process began in 2010. Over the past 2 years, implementation of a project to develop a priority-setting tool based on evidence-informed deliberative processes has made it possible to discuss the participation of patients in HTA. We explored the possibilities of participation of patients or a patient-oriented group in the HTA process.

Structured interviews were held with eight people with interests in HTA. Two were representatives of universities, two from a patient-oriented group, two experts in HTA, and two physicians. Interviews were held online by mobile phone or Zoom for 25–30 minutes. Question structures were formed based on the report ‘Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment in Europe 2010’. Seven stages were considered.

All participants partially or completely agreed with the involvement of patients at the HTA stages of identification and prioritization. One or two did not agree with their involvement at the HTA assessment, information production, internal and external review, and diffusion and dissemination stages. Challenges for patient involvement in HTA can be related to other commitments for patients and their carers, lack of financial affordability, conflict of interest, and lack of capacity of the HTA agency to involve them. Five participants agreed on challenges for patients to being meaningfully involved in decision-making on health technologies. These included understanding which institution makes the decisions, finding an interlocutor within the decision-making body, and understanding the decision-making process. Other issues were technical and language difficulties, lack of commitment from decision-makers and the legal or policy framework for patient involvement in HTA decision-making.

Patients can participate in HTA, but the HTA agency must first prepare and agree on the level of patient participation, and develop measures to reduce barriers such as language difficulties, and patient obligations.

The transition from the budget model of the healthcare system to compulsory social health insurance has created a competitive environment among hospitals in Kazakhstan. Managers are interested in introducing the most effective new technologies. Implementation of the health technology assessment (HTA) process in Kazakhstan began in 2010 but few managers have created a structure for HTA development in their hospitals. Our aim was to identify issues in the implementation of new health technologies in hospitals.

Structured interviews were held with hospital managers and physicians in June 2020, and September 2021. In the first stage, the needs of hospitals in the implementation of new technologies were considered. In the second stage, the impact of COVID-19 on the introduction of new technologies in the hospital was addressed. Interviews were held on-line by mobile phone or zoom and lasted 25-30 minutes.

The first interviews involved 8 managers and 14 physicians from 5 hospitals. The needs of HTA for physicians was noted by respondents of both groups. Only a few physicians had been trained in HTA. Hospital staff lacked time and experience in preparing applications for new technologies by a national assessment unit and could not meet deadlines. Managers were interested in use of HTA for hospitals’ technologies in short-term timeframes within existing policies. However, physicians believed that long-term performance of technologies over 5 years or more should also be considered in hospital management. Physicians were aware of the importance of ethical considerations in the HTA of new health technologies. Managers did not consider ethical issues.

At the second stage of the project, 5 managers and 8 physicians were interviewed. COVID-19 had shown the importance and necessity of developing the scientific potential of doctors, and of introducing HTA and training medical personnel in its use.

Positive outcomes from the interviews were the interest of respondents in increasing their knowledge of the HTA process and acceptance of its importance at the hospital level.

The experience of implementing a hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) system in Kazakhstan is currently represented by only one organization, an independent HB-HTA unit established in 2015 in the Medical Center Hospital of the President's Affairs Administration (the Hospital). Despite the demonstrated positive experience of the Hospital, the widespread implementation of the HB-HTA system in Kazakhstan has experienced some barriers that must be considered before further development can occur.

To determine the barriers to developing and implementing HB-HTA in Kazakhstani hospitals, data from the Hospital's experience were obtained through a survey of Kazakhstan hospitals, conducted on behalf of the Ministry of Health Care. An official response was received from 29 hospitals. During the survey and discussions with hospital staff using the “brainstorming” method, several barriers to the development of HB-HTA in Kazakhstan were identified.

Barriers at the system level included the lack of monitoring of the HB-HTA system at the national and regional levels and a lack of methodological support. Organizational barriers included a critically small number of HTA experts and the need for additional logistical support and funding from hospitals. The subjective factors we attributed to the rejection of the HB-HTA system by hospital management were the underestimation of lost profits and that HTA is a tool for promoting a transparent and open system for making managerial decisions.

Despite some barriers, the development of HB-HTA in Kazakhstan is a promising area. The heads of key hospitals in Kazakhstan demonstrated a readiness and understanding of the need to use the principles of health technology assessment and clinical and economic analysis to promote the active transfer and implementation of innovative medical technologies.

According to international experience in the field of hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA), most of the implemented new health technologies must undergo a clinical and economic assessment (CEA) of their viability by creating a mini-health technology assessment report. However, HB-HTA should not be limited only to the initial CEA; further monitoring of the effectiveness of implemented new health technologies is necessary.

We developed a special reporting form for creating a CEA of implemented new health technologies and integrated it into the hospital information system. Indicators of clinical effectiveness are determined individually for each implemented technology. The main indicators of economic effectiveness are financial results (or net profit) and profitability—high-cost and high-tech health technologies have priority for monitoring.

In order to ensure a more detailed and complete CEA of implemented health technologies, the following measures were proposed: (i) before implementing the technology, determine the key clinical effectiveness criteria for further monitoring for each implemented health technology; (ii) if possible, determine comparative technologies (alternatives or analogs) for conducting comparative CEA of the implemented health technologies; and (iii) carry out a prospective CEA of the implemented health technologies with a view to publishing the results.

The organization of a continuous monitoring process that analyzes the effectiveness and usage of new health technologies in hospital practice will allow assessment of the following: the clinical effectiveness and safety of the implemented technologies in comparison with world data; the economic effectiveness of the technology, including an accurate calculation of the payback period for investments; and the “real” data on the effectiveness of implemented health technologies in comparison with the initial request for implementation.

Hospital-based health technology assessment (HB-HTA) in Kazakhstan is currently at the initial stage of development. The Medical Center Hospital of the President's Affairs Administration, Nur-Sultan is one of the first examples of implementing and using an HB-HTA system in practice, having included in its structure an HB-HTA unit in 2015.

In order to evaluate the current situation of using the principles of HB-HTA in Kazakhstan hospitals, a special questionnaire was developed. The questionnaire was sent in the form of an official request on behalf of the Ministry of Health Care. An official response was received from twenty-nine hospitals, of which nine were at the federal level, thirteen at the regional level, and seven at the city level.

Of the twenty-nine hospitals that participated in the survey, only half (52%) indicated that they were aware of the principles of using the HB-HTA system and of the structure and functions of mini-health technology assessment reports (55%). Nonetheless, most hospitals (90%) noted that the results of HB-HTA may affect the final decision on implementing new technologies in practice, and that using the systematic approach of technology assessment is necessary.

In assessing the clinical and economic effectiveness of new health technologies in hospitals, and the viability of implementing them, there is a lack of standardized processes in managerial decision making. The assessment of clinical effectiveness and safety when implementing technologies is carried out mainly by technology applicants or by the main specialists who are responsible for the profile of evaluating technology. This can be regarded as a conflict of interest, since the applicant's wish to introduce the new technology may bias the evaluation process.

Telerehabilitation shows promise in many fields though strong evidence of benefit has been limited. We reviewed progress in the use of telerehabilitation for persons with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A challenge in caring for persons with this condition is the ability to achieve high levels of patient participation and compliance with rehabilitation processes.

Relevant publications were identified through literature searches from November 2009 to May 2018. We selected those that described studies of telerehabilitation in the management of COPD and reported clinical or administrative outcomes. Study quality was assessed using an approach that considers both study performance and study design. Judgments were made on whether the telerehabilitation application had been successful, if reported outcomes were clinically significant, and if further data were needed to establish the application as suitable for routine use.

Twenty-five publications, on 26 studies, were selected. Twelve were of high or good quality. In 11 studies the telemedicine application was successful. Nine studies had unsuccessful applications, and for six studies success was unclear. Further data before routine use would be required or desirable for all successful applications. In many studies there were difficulties associated with availability of skilled mentors, motivational support for patients and access to reliable remote monitoring and communication technology.

Various types of telerehabilitation are potentially helpful in the management of COPD. Availability and access to these technologies should improve. However, in management of this clinically challenging condition their use must be linked to suitable training and education of patients with COPD and timely support for them from healthcare professionals.

ABC-VEN analysis is an easy method of clinical and economic analysis on the costs of drug coverage and an important tool for monitoring and ensuring the rational use of medicines. However, this methodology is difficult to apply in assessing the viability of medical equipment procurement (MEP) in hospital. Using a combined model of ABC analysis and Multiple criteria decision analysis (MCDA) may be more appropriate to apply to MEP.

We created five standardized criteria, which present the main results of assessment of the viability of MEP for implementing new health technologies (HTs). These criteria address the following: 1) Novelty/innovation; 2) Comparative clinical effectiveness and safety; 3) Relevance (demand); 4) Economic effectiveness; and 5) Payback period. Based on these criteria we determine the threshold values of priority for MEP: 1) High priority; 2) Medium priority; 3) Low priority.

Using the ABC model and five standardized criteria, we analyzed all proposals from the Hospital units for implementing new HTs connected with MEP for 2018. In total, proposals contained 11 items of ME, among them three items were in group A (27%), two items were in group B (18%), and six items were in group C (55%). All items were high priority for procurement with the exception of one item from group B with medium priority. Items with low priority were not revealed which can be considered as a direct indicator of the operational effectiveness of Hospital-based HTA Unit. Excluding ME with a medium priority from the procurement plan would reduce Hospital costs by 13.5 percent.

Combined ABC and MCDA analysis in the process of assessment the viability of MEP can give the opportunity to make comparative assessment of different types of ME based on standardized criteria; determine the priority for procurement of new ME; and avoid the influence of subjective factors of the managerial decision-making process in hospital.

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.

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.

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.

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.

One of the main tools for Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment (HB HTA) is the preparation of a mini-health technology assessment (HTA) report. Despite the high value of the results of mini-HTA reports for hospital decision-makers, the classical mini-HTA report does not allow a direct comparison of several health technologies among themselves.

Based on the analysis of international experience of using the principles of multiple-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) in the field of HB HTA, we created and approved our own managerial decision-making model which includes five standardized multiple criteria. The value (weight) of each criterion was defined as the arithmetic mean obtained as a result of interviewing hospital decision-makers and an HTA expert group.

Five standardized multiple criteria were included in the structure of our mini-HTA report. These criteria presented the main results of assessment of the viability of implementing new health technologies (HTs) in hospital practice and contain the following: i) Novelty/innovation; ii) Comparative clinical effectiveness and safety; iii) Relevance (demand); iv) Economic effectiveness; and, v) Payback period. We conducted the modeling of various options of HTA results by using multiple criteria, which allowed us to determine the threshold values of the evaluated HTs corresponding to their priority for implementation: i) High priority - HTs are recommended for implementation; ii) Medium priority - HTs can be recommended only if there are sufficient financial resources in hospital; and, iii) Low priority - HTs may be recommended only if there are strong reasons for their need.

Integration of the principles of MCDA in the structure of mini-HTA reports gives the opportunity to i) make comparative assessments of implementing new health technologies based on standardized criteria; ii) determine the priority for implementation of newly evaluated health technologies; iii) avoid the influence of subjective factors on the managerial decision-making in hospitals.

Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies wish to ensure the impact of their HTAs. HTA impact assessment measures the influence of a HTA on decision-making and downstream to patient outcomes. Despite their potential to provide insights, the use of impact assessment frameworks by HTA agencies is limited. Understanding the underlying mechanisms of adopting HTA impact assessment frameworks is therefore important. Using a social cognitions lens, this study aims to provide insights into the enabling and hindering factors associated with the assessment of HTA impact by INAHTA members.

Using an interpretive description design, this cross-sectional study used semi-structured interviews of INAHTA members to gain insight into attitudes, social support, self-efficacy, barriers, and intentions towards HTA impact assessment. Transcriptions were analyzed using a social cognitions lens by two researchers using a constant comparative method to identify themes.

Twenty-six of forty-seven INAHTA members participated. Preliminary results showed that interviewees most often perceived support for assessing impact from their ministry of health or from agency staff. Most interviewees noted challenges to measuring impact at the right time and a lack of human resources, methods, and tools as internal barriers. A lack of transparency and a limited impact assessment culture were perceived as the main external barriers. Interviewees reported feeling fairly confident in overcoming internal barriers, but were less confident in overcoming external barriers. Providing feedback for improvement to HTA processes and making achievements visible were the most frequently reported advantages of assessing impact, whereas its time consuming nature was the biggest disadvantage.

This is the first study to use a social cognitions model to understand HTA impact assessment. Although the results of this convenience sample need to be interpreted with caution, they contribute knowledge on factors that facilitate and hinder agencies in the assessment of impact and illuminate opportunities for developing effective strategies to support HTA agencies in this area.

Cochlear implantation (CI) is a standard technology for the management of children with sensorineural hearing loss. In the Republic of Kazakhstan (RK), CI was introduced in 2007. In 2012, a report for the Ministry of Health (MoH) of the RK considered the effectiveness of CI, age of implantation, use of clinical protocols, and availability of audiological screening and rehabilitation services. We assessed the influence of the report findings on the provision of medical care in the RK for children with sensorineural hearing loss.

Information was collected in a survey of all RK health regions on issues related to CI, audiological screening and rehabilitation. Administrative data relevant to the provision of CI in the RK were obtained from the MoH. Data obtained were compared with those available for preparation of the 2012 report.

The proportion of medical organizations with equipment to provide audiological screening had improved, from 29 percent in 2012 to 90 percent in 2018. The proportion of children under two receiving CI increased from 12 percent to 36 percent, while that for children over five years decreased from 48 percent to 17 percent. A clinical protocol for CI in children was developed by a center in the MoH. Progress with post-CI rehabilitation of children was limited by a lack of specialists in the health regions. The proportion of school-age children with implants who have attended general schools remains low.

The findings of the HTA report had a positive influence on availability of screening services and a protocol for CI. The average age of children receiving an implant has decreased, though it is still higher than in other countries. The need for improvements in post-CI rehabilitation and placement of children with implants in general schools is recognized but these await further resources.