ISPOR Working Group on Good Practices in HTA Provides First Major Synthesis Report in 20 Years
Lawrenceville, NJ, USA—January 21, 2019—ISPOR—the professional society for health economics and outcomes research—announced today the publication of the first report in 20 years to comprehensively synthesize good practices in health technology assessment (HTA)—intended to support population-based decision making for pharmaceuticals, medical devices, and other health technologies. The report, “Identifying the Need for Good Practices in Health Technology Assessment: Summary of the ISPOR HTA Council Working Group Report on Good Practices in HTA,” was published in the January 2019 issue of Value in Health.
The paper is the work of prominent experts in health technology assessment (HTA) who are members of the “Overview Of Good Practices For Synthesizing And Using Evidence In Healthcare Decision Making” Working Group of the ISPOR Health Technology Assessment Council. The authors point out that while most research articles on HTA focus on research methods, HTA is defined not by its methods but by its intent, which is to inform healthcare decision making. In keeping with this focus, the Working Group members have provided important guidance for practice. They framed their report around 4 primary themes: (1) defining the HTA process, (2) synthesizing evidence (assessment), (3) using evidence (contextualization), and (4) implementing and monitoring HTA.
The primary audience for this report are those who manage, design, or seek to improve HTA processes, although it is informative to a wider audience of patients, healthcare providers, payers, academics, and industry stakeholders. Given the large scope of this work, the HTA Council Working Group created this overview report that included a summary of key references related to good practices in HTA. The report outlines where there appears to be guidance for good practices and where guidance is still emerging (or could not be identified) with a view to prioritizing next steps that may be taken by ISPOR and other interested parties.
“We identified 3 areas where few good practices in HTA have been developed or where there is no clear consensus,” noted author Don Husereau, MSc, BScPharm, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada. “These areas include the structure/governance/organizational aspects of HTA, the deliberative processes and other methods for integrating social values in HTA, and measuring the impact of HTA. In my opinion, the area of integrating social values is the most important and underdeveloped aspect of HTA. HTA bodies have increasingly been exploring how to best integrate social values, particularly patient values, but many fall short of standards for deliberative processes that are fair and transparent.”
The report authors are global experts in the field of HTA and include:
- Finn Børlum Kristensen, MD, PhD; University of Southern Denmark; Odense, Denmark
- Don Husereau, MSc, BScPharm; Institute of Health Economics; Edmonton, AB, Canada; University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; and University of Health Sciences, Medical Informatics, and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria
- Federico Augustovski, MD, MS, PhD; Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy; Buenos Aires, Argentina
- Marc L. Berger, MD; New York, NY, USA
- Kenneth Bond, MA; Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Andrew Booth, PhD; ScHARR; The University of Sheffield; Sheffield, England, UK
- John F. P. Bridges, PhD; The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
- Michael F. Drummond, DPhil, MCom, BSc; University of York; York, England, UK
- Jeremy Grimshaw, MBCHB, PhD; Cochrane Canada and University of Ottawa; Ottawa, ON, Canada
- Mirjana Huić, MD, MSc; Agency for Quality and Accreditation in Health Care and Social Welfare; Zagreb, Croatia
- Maarten J. IJzerman, PhD; University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia; University of Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands
- Egon Jonsson, PhD; Institute of Health Economics; Edmonton, AB, Canada
- Daniel A. Ollendorf, MPH, PhD; Tufts University, Boston, MA, USA
- Alric Rüther, dr. med; Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care; Cologne, Germany
- Uwe Siebert, MD, MPH, MSc, ScD; University of Health Sciences, Medical Informatics, and Technology, Hall in Tirol, Austria; ONCOTYROL – Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine, Innsbruck, Austria; Massachusetts General Hospital, and Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
- Jitendar Sharma, PhD, AP MedTech Zone and Department of Health and Family Welfare; Andhra Pradesh, India
- Allan Wailoo, PhD, MSc, MA; ScHARR; University of Sheffield and NICE Decision Support Unit; Sheffield, England, UK
ISPOR, the professional society for health economics and outcomes research (HEOR), is an international, multistakeholder, nonprofit dedicated to advancing HEOR excellence to improve decision making for health globally. The Society is the leading source for scientific conferences, peer-reviewed and MEDLINE®-indexed publications, good practices guidance, education, collaboration, and tools/resources in the field.
Web: www.ispor.org | LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/ispororg | Twitter: www.twitter.com/ISPORorg (@ISPORorg) | YouTube: www.youtube.com/user/ISPORorg/videos | Facebook: www.facebook.com/ISPORorg | Instagram: www.instagram.com/ISPORorg
ABOUT VALUE IN HEALTH
Value in Health (ISSN 1098-3015) is an international, indexed journal that publishes original research and health policy articles that advance the field of health economics and outcomes research to help healthcare leaders make evidence-based decisions. The journal’s 2017 impact factor score is 5.494. Value in Health is ranked 3rd among 94 journals in healthcare sciences and services, 3rd among 79 journals in health policy and services, and 6th among 353 journals in economics. Value in Health is a monthly publication that circulates to more than 10,000 readers around the world.
Web: www.ispor.org/valueinhealth | Twitter: www.twitter.com/ISPORJournals (@ISPORjournals)
ABOUT THE ISPOR HTA WORKING GROUP
The objective of the Working Group is to develop guidance on good practices in informing evidence-based, population-based (ie, payer) decision making for new interventions, with an emphasis on HTA approaches. Guidance recommendations will be useful for those developing or involved in HTA processes—that is, key stakeholders including decision makers, industry, regulators, healthcare providers, researchers, academia, as well as patient representatives. A review of good practices can provide a foundation for developing or refining local/regional/national HTA processes and contribute to successful implementation of newly developed HTA processes in countries around the world.