While ethics has been identified as a core component of health technology assessment (HTA), there are few examples of practical, systematic inclusion of ethics analysis in HTA. Some attribute the scarcity of ethics analysis in HTA to debates about appropriate methodology and the need for ethics frameworks that are relevant to local social values. The “South African Values and Ethics for Universal Health Coverage” (SAVE-UHC) project models an approach that countries can use to develop HTA ethics frameworks that are specific to their national contexts.

The SAVE-UHC approach consisted of two phases. In Phase I, the research team convened and facilitated a national multistakeholder working group to develop a provisional ethics framework through a collaborative, engagement-driven process. In Phase II, the research team refined the model framework by piloting it through three simulated HTA appraisal committee meetings. Each simulated committee reviewed two case studies of sample health interventions: opioid substitution therapy and either a novel contraceptive implant or seasonal influenza immunization for children under five.

The methodology was fit-for-purpose, resulting in a context-specified ethics framework and producing relevant findings to inform application of the framework for the given HTA context.

The SAVE-UHC approach provides a model for developing, piloting, and refining an ethics framework for health priority-setting that is responsive to national social values. This approach also helps identify key facilitators and challenges for integrating ethics analysis into HTA processes.

Mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) increases the risk of hospital-acquired conditions (HACs) such as ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and pressure injuries (PrI). Continuous lateral rotation therapy (CLRT) has been shown to reduce VAP and PrI incidence, but the value of switching to CLRT over standard care is presently unknown. We evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CLRT beds compared to standard care in ICUs and determine the return on investment (ROI) associated with its implementation.

A Markov model was constructed to predict health state transitions from the time of ventilation through 28 days using the healthcare sector perspective. Daily transition probabilities were extrapolated from prospective clinical studies comparing CLRT with standard care. Costs were estimated in 2014 USD. Utility scores were extracted from the published literature. Cost per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) was calculated and sensitivity analyses were conducted. A secondary analysis from a societal perspective with a one-year time horizon included the costs of patient and caregiver lost productivity. ROI analysis was performed to estimate the net benefit and breakeven point of the investment. Value of Information analysis was performed to determine whether further research is warranted.

From both perspectives, CLRT was dominant. From the healthcare sector perspective, the expected cost for CLRT per patient was USD 47,165 compared to standard care at USD 49,258 per patient, showing that CLRT saves cost per patient. The expected effectiveness of CLRT per patient was 0.0418 QALYs compared to 0.0416 QALYs for standard care. CLRT was dominant in 99.94 percent of Monte Carlo simulations. CLRT also reached the break-even point after 5 months. Expected Value of Perfect Information was equal to 0.019, indicating little value of additional evidence at the current level of parameter uncertainty.

CLRT is highly cost-effective compared to standard care by preventing ventilator-associated infections and PrIs in an ICU setting.