Health technology assessment (HTA) is a cost-effective resource allocation tool in healthcare decision-making processes; however, its use is limited in low-income settings where countries fall short on both absorptive and technical capacity. This paper describes the journey of the introduction of HTA into decision-making processes through a case study revising the National Essential Medicines List (NEMLIT) in Tanzania. It draws lessons on establishing and strengthening transparent priority-setting processes, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa.

The concept of HTA was introduced in Tanzania through revision of the NEMLIT by identifying a process for using HTA criteria and evidence-informed decision making. Training was given on using economic evidence for decision making, which was then put into practice for medicine selection for the NEMLIT. During the revision process, capacity-building workshops were held with reinforcing messages on HTA.

Between the period 2014 and 2018, HTA was introduced in Tanzania with a formal HTA committee being established and inaugurated followed by the successful completion and adoption of HTA into the NEMLIT revision process by the end of 2017. Consequently, the country is in the process of institutionalizing HTA for decision making and priority setting.

While the introduction of HTA process is country-specific, key lessons emerge that can provide an example to stakeholders in other low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) wishing to introduce priority-setting processes into health decision making.

The terminology used to describe community participation in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is contested and frequently confusing. The terms patients, consumers, public, lay members, customers, users, citizens, and others have been variously used, sometimes interchangeably. Clarity in the use of terms and goals for including the different groups is needed to mitigate existing inconsistencies in the application of patient and public involvement (PPI) across HTA processes around the world.

We drew from a range of literature sources in order to conceptualize (i) an operational definition for the “public” and other stakeholders in the context of HTA and (ii) possible goals for their involvement. Draft definitions were tested and refined in an iterative consensus-building process with stakeholders from around the world.

The goals, terminology, interests, and roles for PPI in HTA processes were clarified. The research provides rationales for why the role of the public should be distinguished from that of patients, their families, and caregivers. A definition for the public in the context of HTA was developed: A community member who holds the public interest and has no commercial, personal, or professional interest in the HTA process

There are two distinct aspects to the interests held by the public which should be explicitly included in the HTA process: the first lies in ensuring democratic accountability and the second in recognising the importance of including public values in decision making.

Quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) are commonly used in cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to measure health benefits. We sought to quantify and explain differences between QALY- and DALY-based cost-effectiveness ratios, and explore whether using one versus the other would materially affect conclusions about an intervention's cost-effectiveness.

We identified CEAs using both QALYs and DALYs from the Tufts Medical Center CEA Registry and Global Health CEA Registry, with a supplemental search to ensure comprehensive literature coverage. We calculated absolute and relative differences between the QALY- and DALY-based ratios, and compared ratios to common benchmarks (e.g., 1× gross domestic product per capita). We converted reported costs into US dollars.

Among eleven published CEAs reporting both QALYs and DALYs, seven focused on pharmaceuticals and infectious disease, and five were conducted in high-income countries. Four studies concluded that the intervention was “dominant” (cost-saving). Among the QALY- and DALY-based ratios reported from the remaining seven studies, absolute differences ranged from approximately $2 to $15,000 per unit of benefit, and relative differences from 6–120 percent, but most differences were modest in comparison with the ratio value itself. The values assigned to utility and disability weights explained most observed differences. In comparison with cost-effectiveness thresholds, conclusions were consistent regardless of the ratio type in ten of eleven cases.

Our results suggest that although QALY- and DALY-based ratios for the same intervention can differ, differences tend to be modest and do not materially affect comparisons to common cost-effectiveness thresholds.

To assess the cost effectiveness from a Canadian perspective of index patient germline BRCA testing and then, if positive, family members with subsequent risk-reducing surgery (RRS) in as yet unaffected mutation carriers compared with no testing and treatment of cancer when it develops.

A patient level simulation was developed comparing outcomes between two groups using Canadian data. Group 1: no mutation testing with treatment if cancer developed. Group 2: cascade testing (index patient BRCA tested and first-/second-degree relatives tested if index patient/first-degree relative is positive) with RRS in carriers. End points were the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) and budget impact.

There were 29,102 index patients: 2,786 ovarian cancer and 26,316 breast cancer (BC). Using the base-case assumption of 44 percent and 21 percent of women with a BRCA mutation receiving risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy and risk-reducing mastectomy, respectively, testing was cost effective versus no testing and treatment on cancer development, with an ICER of CAD 14,942 (USD 10,555) per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY), 127 and 104 fewer cases of ovarian and BC, respectively, and twenty-one fewer all-cause deaths. Testing remained cost effective versus no testing at the commonly accepted North American threshold of approximately CAD 100,000 (or USD 100,000) per QALY gained in all scenario analyses, and cost effectiveness improved as RRS uptake rates increased.

Prevention via testing and RRS is cost effective at current RRS uptake rates; however, optimization of uptake rates and RRS will increase cost effectiveness and can provide cost savings.

In the past decade, with the ever-increasing growth of information and communication technologies, telerehabilitation, especially home-based rehabilitation (HBR), has been widely considered by researchers. Many software systems are developed to address HBR programs, which includes various functionalities. The aim of this study is to review the functional features of these systems designed for remote supervising of HBR programs.

Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library, IEEE Xplore Digital Library, and ProQuest databases were searched for English-language articles published between January 2008 and February 2018 to retrieve studies reported an home-based telerehabilitation software system aiming to remotely supervise HBR program.

A total of fifty studies that reported twenty-two unique systems met the inclusion criteria. Various functional features were identified including but not limited to exercise plan management, report/statistics generating, patient education, and task scheduling. Disorders or diseases addressed by these systems could mainly be grouped into five categories: musculoskeletal, neurological, respiratory, cardiovascular, and other health-related problems. Usability and acceptability, and clinical/patient outcomes were the most reported outcomes and data analysis was used by the majority of included studies to measure the outcomes.

Systems developed for supervising of HBR program are diverse. However, preliminary results of this review revealed that these systems share more or less common functionalities. However, further research is needed to determine the requirements, structure, and effectiveness of these systems in real-life settings.

Telestroke is an effective way to improve care and health outcomes for stroke patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of a French telestroke network.

A decision analysis model was built using population-based data. We compared short-term clinical outcomes and costs for the management of acute ischemic stroke patients before and after the implementation of a telestroke network from the point of view of the national health insurance system. Three effectiveness endpoints were used: hospital death, death at 3 months, and severe disability 3 months after stroke (assessed with the modified Rankin scale). Most clinical and economic parameters were estimated from the medical files of 742 retrospectively included patients. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

The analyses revealed that the telestroke strategy was more effective and slightly more costly than the reference strategy (25 disability cases avoided per 1,000 at 3 months, 6.7 avoided hospital deaths, and 13 avoided deaths at 3 months for an extra cost of EUR 97, EUR 138, and EUR 154, respectively). The results remained robust in the sensitivity analyses.

In France, telestroke is an effective strategy for improving patient outcomes and, despite the extra cost, it has a legitimate place in the national health care system.

When assessing the economic value of vaccines, decision makers should adopt a full societal perspective. One approach for estimation of the fiscal impact of a disease is to use the human capital method to determine productivity losses. The aim of this study was to test an analytical framework developed for the estimation of the fiscal impacts of vaccination programs for influenza (FLU), pneumococcus (PC), and herpes zoster (HZ), in Italy.

We tested the framework in a two-stage analysis. First, we estimated the fiscal impact of the disease, second we performed a cost–benefit analysis of the individual benefits of vaccination against the cost of the vaccine. To estimate the fiscal impact of the diseases, the human capital approach was used. Epidemiological data were extrapolated from the literature. A Monte Carlo simulation enabled exploration of the uncertainty in the model variables.

For FLU, assuming 2.1 million people infected, the total expected impact was EUR 999,371,520; the estimated fiscal impact was EUR 159,563,520. For PC, assuming 90,000 people infected, the total impact was EUR 148,055,040 and the estimated fiscal impact was EUR 23,639,040. For HZ, assuming 6,400 people infected, the total impact was EUR 4,777,200, with EUR 630,000 resulting from a decrease in fiscal taxation.

In conclusion, our work shows how traditional methods aimed at estimating the cost of illness from a social perspective can be improved by additionally considering the fiscal impact, which accounts for the decrease in fiscal revenues due to illness.

Mobile health (mHealth) due to its popularity and accessibility can be widely applied in different health areas such as the management of chronic diseases. However, its success depends on the acceptance of their users. Therefore, the aim of this study was to survey the attitudes of patients with chronic disease toward mHealth technology and their willingness to use it.

This study was conducted within a 2-year period (2016–2018) to determine and compare the attitude and willingness of patients with asthma, diabetes, and multiple sclerosis (MS) toward using mHealth technology in a province in Iran.

In total, 222 patients participated in this study. More than 93 percent of the patients with diabetes and MS, and 65 percent of the asthmatic patients preferred using mHealth services rather than consulting a physician (p < .0001). About 98, 94, and 49 percent of the MS, diabetic, and asthmatic patients, respectively felt comfortable if their health conditions checked by physicians through mHealth technology (p < .0001).

Our results showed that the majority of the patients felt comfortable and preferred using mHealth technology rather than consulting the physicians. The attitudes of diabetic and MS patients toward mHealth technology were rather more positive compared to asthmatic patient attitude. These results may be helpful for the developers of mHealth technology, and researchers who design mHelath interventions for patients with chronic disease.

Patients with distributive shock who are unresponsive to traditional vasopressors are commonly considered to have severe distributive shock and are at high mortality risk. Here, we assess the cost-effectiveness of adding angiotensin II to the standard of care (SOC) for severe distributive shock in the US critical care setting from a US payer perspective.

Short-term mortality outcomes were based on 28-day survival rates from the ATHOS-3 study. Long-term outcomes were extrapolated to lifetime survival using individually estimated life expectancies for survivors. Resource use and adverse event costs were drawn from the published literature. Health outcomes evaluated were lives saved, life-years gained, and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained using utility estimates for the US adult population weighted for sepsis mortality. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses assessed uncertainty around results. We analyzed patients with severe distributive shock from the ATHOS-3 clinical trial.

The addition of angiotensin II to the SOC saved .08 lives at Day 28 compared to SOC alone. The cost per life saved was estimated to be $108,884. The addition of angiotensin II to the SOC was projected to result in a gain of .96 life-years and .66 QALYs. This resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $12,843 per QALY. The probability of angiotensin II being cost-effective at a threshold of $50,000 per QALY was 86 percent.

For treatment of severe distributive shock, angiotensin II is cost-effective at acceptable thresholds.

Transcatheter aortic-valve implantation (TAVI) has become an essential alternative to surgical aortic-valve replacement in the treatment of symptomatic severe aortic stenosis, and this procedure requires technical expertise. The aim of this study was to identify prospective studies on TAVI from the past 10 years, and then to analyze the quality of information reported about the learning curve.

A systematic review of articles published between 2007 and 2017 was performed using PubMed and the EMBASE database. Prospective studies regarding TAVI were included. The quality of information reported about the learning curve was evaluated using the following criteria: mention of the learning curve, the description of a roll-in phase, the involvement of a proctor, and the number of patients suggested to maintain skills.

A total of sixty-eight studies met the selection criteria and were suitable for analysis. The learning curve was addressed in approximately half of the articles (n = 37, 54 percent). However, the roll-in period was mentioned by only eight studies (12 percent) and with very few details. Furthermore, a proctorship was disclosed in three articles (4 percent) whereas twenty-five studies (37 percent) included authors that were proctors for manufacturers of TAVI.

Many prospective studies on TAVI over the past 10 years mention learning curves as a core component of successful TAVI procedures. However, the quality of information reported about the learning curve is relatively poor, and uniform guidance on how to properly assess the learning curve is still missing.

Gather health technology assessment (HTA) experts' insights on the desirability and acceptability of treatment-sequencing models applied to relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS).

Primary data.

In-depth double-blind semi-structured telephone interviews.

General themes were extracted from qualitative interviews.

Although experts confirmed the importance of evaluating the clinical and cost-effectiveness of treatments as part of a sequence, the current HTA decision making framework is not conducive to this. Developing an RRMS treatment-sequencing model that meets HTA requirements is difficult, in particular due to scarcity of effectiveness data in later treatment lines.

At present, a treatment-sequencing model for RRMS may be desirable yet not requested by HTA bodies for their decision making. However, there could be other areas where a treatment-sequencing model for RRMS is of use.

Stunting increases a child's susceptibility to diseases, increases mortality, and is associated over long term with reduced cognitive abilities, educational achievement, and productivity. We aimed to assess the most effective public health nutritional intervention to reduce stunting in Myanmar.

We searched the literature and developed a conceptual framework for interventions known to reduce stunting. We focused on the highest impact and most feasible interventions to reduce stunting in Myanmar, described policies to implement them, and compared their costs and projected effect on stunting using data-based decision trees. We estimated costs from the government perspective and calculated total projected cases of stunting prevented and cost per case prevented (cost-effectiveness). All interventions were compared to projected cases of stunting resulting from the current situation (e.g., no additional interventions).

Three new policy options were identified. Operational feasibility for all three options ranged from medium to high. Compared to the current situation, two were similarly cost-effective, at an additional USD 598 and USD 667 per case of stunting averted. The third option was much less cost-effective, at an additional USD 27,741 per case averted. However, if donor agencies were to expand their support in option three to the entire country, the prevalence of 22.5 percent would be reached by 2025 at an additional USD 667 per case averted.

A policy option involving immediate expansion of the current implementation of proven nutrition-specific interventions is feasible. It would have the highest impact on stunting and would approach the WHO 2025 target.

One of the good practice principles for health technology assessment (HTA) is having a clear link between the assessment and decision making. The objective of the 2019 Latin American Policy Forum (LatamPF) of Health Technology Assessment International was to explore different models of connection between HTA and decision making and to discuss the potential applicability of such models in Latin America.

This paper is based on a background document and the deliberations of the members of the LatamPF (fifty-four participants from twelve countries) where a design-thinking methodology was used.

The participants agreed that insufficient links between HTA and decision making undermine the legitimacy of decisions, expose the HTA process to excessive political and judicial influence, and promote the exclusion of some stakeholders from participating in the assessment process and decision making. High priority aspects of the HTA process that could feasibly be improved and which hold the greatest potential to generate positive changes in the health systems in the region were identified. The majority of these aspects were associated with the appropriate institutionalization of HTA, a greater degree of participation by different stakeholders, and improved transparency in the HTA process.

The LatamPF identified barriers and recommended actions to strengthen the link between HTA and decision making. Participants emphasized that there is now a window of opportunity in the region as many societal actors see this as a priority. For this reason, health system stakeholders must take this opportunity to increase efforts toward strengthening the link between HTA and decision making.

Un vínculo claro entre la evaluación y la toma de decisión constituye un principio de buena práctica en evaluación de tecnologías sanitarias (ETESA) reconocido a nivel internacional. El objetivo del Foro de Políticas en Latino-América (LatamPF) 2019 de Health Technology Assessment International fue explorar los diferentes modelos que vinculan la ETESA y la toma de decisión y discutir su potencial aplicabilidad en Latino-América.

Este manuscrito está basado en un documento base y en el trabajo deliberativo realizado por los miembros (54 participantes, 12 países) que asistieron al LatamPF, a través de la metodología design thinking.

Los participantes coincidieron en que la relación inapropiada entre la ETESA y la toma de decisión atenta hoy contra la legitimidad de las decisiones, expone al proceso de ETESA a una excesiva influencia política y judicial, y condiciona que algunos actores se sientan relegados del proceso de evaluación y toma de decisión. Se identificaron los atributos del proceso de ETESA más prioritarios y factibles de ser mejorados en la región, y con el mayor potencial para generar un cambio positivo en los sistemas de salud. La mayor parte de estos están vinculados con la apropiada institucionalización de la ETESA, ampliar la participación de los diferentes actores y mejorar la transparencia de los procesos de ETESA.

El LatamPF ha identificado barreras y recomendado acciones para reforzar el vínculo entre ETESA y la decisión. A su vez, existe en estos momentos una ventana de oportunidad en la región, ya que el tema es visualizado como una prioridad por gran parte de los actores de la sociedad. Por ello, los diferentes actores de los sistemas sanitarios deberían ahora tomar esta oportunidad para avanzar en el fortalecimiento del vínculo entre ETESA y toma de decisión.