PP020 Decision-Making Beyond Evidence Alone – Topic Prioritization For Health Technology Assessment. (2017)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Ju, Hong; Ng, Kwong; Teo, Elaine; Khoo, Daphne
• Is Part Of: International journal of technology assessment in health care. Volume 33:Supplement 1(2017)
• Page Start: 77
• Page End: 78
• Publication Date: 2017
• Subjects: Medical technology -- Periodicals; Technology assessment -- Periodicals; 610.28
• DOI: 10.1017/S0266462317002112
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0266-4623

Abstract

Abstract : INTRODUCTION: The number of health technologies needing evaluation far outweighs available resources, and most Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies use criteria-based frameworks for topic prioritization (1, 2). Despite variability, most frameworks include clinical, economic and budget impact. Some limitations of current frameworks lack mentioning of any explicit political/ethical deliberation and an evaluation on the potential impact of the HTAs (1). METHODS: During a topic prioritization for HTA, Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD) as destination therapy for adults with end-stage heart failure was submitted. The prioritization criteria used were largely in line with those described above. We also included criteria on ethical/equity consideration and the potential impact of an HTA on decision making. A literature search was conducted to gather clinical and economic evidence on LVAD for the target population, supplemented by local data on potential need for and budget impact of providing a LVAD service. RESULTS: LVAD was scored high on clinical, economic and budget impact with a moderately high need, which would generally subject it to an HTA in order to inform a policy decision. However LVAD was also considered as a technology with a high impact on ethical and political grounds, given that it is a technology offering survival and quality-of-life benefits for a small group of patients for whom effective treatment is otherwise lacking. Through deliberation, the prioritization panel concluded that the impact of an HTA would be low, as a policy decision on whether a LVAD program should be funded would go beyond evidence. Therefore an HTA was not recommended for LVAD. CONCLUSIONS: To inform decision making, an evaluation on the potential impact of the HTA itself taking into account of the ethical/political consideration of funding a technology is of equal importance as the evidence alone. Subsequently, limited HTA resources can be reserved for technologies where an HTA can truly make a difference.