Health Technology Assessment Producers Research Articles

Conducting a health technology assessment in the West Bank, occupied Palestinian territory: lessons from a feasibility project.

To achieve universal health coverage (UHC), countries must make difficult choices to optimize the use of scarce resources. There is a growing interest in using evidence-based priority setting processes, such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA), to inform these decisions. In 2020, the Palestinian Institute of Public Health (PNIPH) and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NIPH) initiated a pilot to test the feasibility of coproducing an HTA on breast cancer screening in the West Bank, occupied Palestinian Territory. Additionally, a secondary aim was to test whether using an adaptive HTA (aHTA) approach that searched and transferred published evidence syntheses could increase the speed of HTA production. The applied stepwise approach to the HTA is described in detail and can be summarized as defining a core team, topic selection, and prioritization; undertaking the HTA including adaptation using tools from the European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA) and stakeholder engagement; and concluding with dissemination. The aHTA approach was faster but not as quick as anticipated, which is attributed to (i) the lack of availability of local evidence for contextualizing findings and (ii) the necessity to build trust between the team and stakeholders. Some delays followed from the COVID-19 pandemic, which showed the importance of good risk anticipation and mitigation. Lastly, other important lessons included the ability of virtual collaborations, the value of capacity strengthening initiatives within low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and the need for early stakeholder engagement. Overall, the pilot was successfully completed. This was the first HTA of its kind produced in Palestine, and despite the challenges, it shows that HTA analysis is feasible in this setting.

PP14 The Role Of Health Technology Assessment In The Public Hospitals Of The National Health Service Of Catalonia

IntroductionHospitals play an essential role to facilitate the appropriate introduction of health technologies into the National Health System. We aimed to analyze if the decision-making at the hospital level is based on health technology assessment (HTA).MethodsWe developed a seventeen-question survey to assess the decision-making mechanisms for the introduction of health innovation into the public hospitals of the National Health Service (NHS) of Catalonia. All questions were related to the field of HTA and health innovation. We asked about the process of new health technology acquisition, the existence of HTA units, and the impact those units might have within the center. We invited the three main public healthcare providers (n= 68 centers). We performed a quantitative analysis grouping the results by type of healthcare provider.ResultsThirty-five different health providers (51.5%) remitted forty-two responses. We identified two differential mechanisms for the introduction of health innovation in those centers: 51.4 percent used a directive committee for decision-making, whereas 37.1 percent employed a technical commission. Some centers (8.6%) used both options. Both the directive committees and technical commissions predominantly considered the professional experience or scientific evidence provided by the healthcare professionals of the center (80%) or external HTA reports or clinical practice guidelines (65.7%) to guide their decision-making. Using HTA products developed within the center was less frequent (34.3%). Only 57.1 percent of the healthcare providers had an HTA unit, but 75 percent of them declared that HTA products had a direct and quantifiable impact on their decision-making regarding the introduction of innovation. Healthcare providers without HTA units manifested their willingness to adopt HTA practices into their decision-making processes.ConclusionsHTA at the hospital level is not a common practice when deciding to introduce innovative health technologies in the NHS of Catalonia. However, the main healthcare providers agreed that the introduction of HTA is necessary for improving their decision-making and that the HTA agency, Agency for Health Quality and Assessment of Catalonia (AQuAS) will play a key role (training, promoting, and assessing).

Institutionalizing health technology assessment in Ethiopia: seizing the window of opportunity.

Ethiopia's commitment to achieving universal health coverage (UHC) requires an efficient and equitable health priority-setting practice. The Ministry of Health aims to institutionalize health technology assessment (HTA) to support evidence-based decision making. This commentary highlights key considerations for successful formulation, adoption, and implementation of HTA policies and practices in Ethiopia, based on a review of international evidence and published normative principles and guidelines. Stakeholder engagement, transparent policymaking, sustainable financing, workforce education, and political economy analysis and power dynamics are critical factors that need to be considered when developing a national HTA roadmap and implementation strategy. To ensure ownership and sustainability of HTA, effective stakeholder engagement and transparency are crucial. Regulatory embedding and sustainable financing ensure legitimacy and continuity of HTA production, and workforce education and training are essential for conducting and interpreting HTA. Political economy analysis helps identify opportunities and constraints for effective HTA implementation. By addressing these considerations, Ethiopia can establish a well-designed HTA system to inform evidence-based and equitable resource allocation toward achieving UHC and improving health outcomes.

PD58 Implementation And Assessment Of A Lung Cancer Screening Pilot Project In Québec Through Multi-Stakeholder Collaboration

IntroductionIn 2019, the Québec provincial health technology assessment body (INESSS) recommended that lung cancer screening with low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) be accessible in Québec only within the context of an evaluation in the ‘real-world’ care setting. Based on this recommendation, the ministry of health (MSSS) decided, in 2020, to implement a screening pilot project and to conduct a formal evaluation, partnering with a clinical leader (principal investigator), participating hospitals, the provincial public health agency (INSPQ) and INESSS. The goal of this evaluation is to facilitate decision-making regarding the implementation of a province-wide screening program.MethodsTo support the implementation of the pilot project, algorithms and recommendations were developed to guide management of screening program participants. This material, based on Lung-RADS (Lung Computed Tomography Screening Reporting and Data System of the American College of Radiology), was developed by reviewing the literature and by consulting clinical experts. The evaluation plan proposes various indicators, focusing on six main topics: (i) costs, (ii) screening and investigation processes, (iii) clinical effectiveness and other effects on health, (iv) effects on smoking cessation, (v) organizational impact and (vi) implementation issues.ResultsINESSS has developed 12 algorithms and close to 50 recommendations for lung cancer screening and investigation, a tool for assessing lung cancer risk and a benefits/risks table. For the evaluation of the pilot project, MSSS, INSPQ and INESSS developed more than 100 indicators; short-term indicators are currently being measured and others will follow in the longer term. Since starting in June 2021, the pilot project is progressing well (as of November 28, 2021): 2,365 people have been referred, 1,272 were eligible for screening, 678 have had their first LDCT and 19 were Lung-RADS 4B or 4X. Results on indicators will help the ministry decide on the feasibility of scaling up screening to the provincial level and will highlight aspects to be improved.ConclusionsThis project shows how health technology assessment products can elicit changes in the health system, and how multi-stakeholder collaboration can actively support practice implementation and inform decision-making.

2.G. Workshop: The development of HTA collaboration in Europe: where we are and where we are going

Abstract Health decision-making should be always well-informed. This draws the attention on the need to make the best use of available evidence in respect to different clinical and non-clinical issues to make a value-based allocation of resources. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is a method for supporting evidence-informed health policymaking as it is defined as a multidisciplinary process that uses explicit methods to determine the value of a health technology at different points in its lifecycle. The role of HTA is of utmost importance at European Union level considering that citizens have the right to access healthcare in any EU country with reimbursement by their home country. Therefore, Member States (MS) cooperation in the evaluation of health technologies is envisaged to ensure safe, high-quality, and efficient healthcare. Several efforts have been put in place at EU level to make this collaboration possible. The cross-border healthcare directive 2011/24/EU have led to the establishment of a voluntary network of MS to facilitate their cooperation and the exchange of scientific information. This network has been supported by another network, namely the European Health Technology Assessment Network (EUnetHTA) that was launched in 2006 with the aim to increase the contribution of HTA to decision-making in EU MS, strengthen the link between HTA and health policymaking, and reduce the overlap and duplication of HTA efforts by promoting a more effective use of resources. EUnetHTA has created a long-lasting Joint Action that has developed principles, methodological guidelines, as well as functional online tools for the sharing production of HTA. In the meantime, starting from 2018, a proposal for an EU regulation on HTA has been discussed within the European Commission first and the European Council and Parliament later. The discussion led to the approval of the Regulation (EU) 2021/2282 on health technology assessment (HTAR) that entered into force on 11 January 2022 and will apply from 12 January 2025 onwards. The HTAR calls for mandatory participation in and use of joint clinical assessments at MS level opening a new era for HTA at EU level. In order to make public health professionals ready for the challenge, this skill-building seminar will provide the audience with basic knowledge in respect to the objective, the application, the methods, and the history of HTA at European level. After two formal presentations on these issues, a case study will lead the following interactive discussion with the audience. Key messages • Health decisions should be informed by the determination of the value of health technologies through shared methods, such as Health Technology Assessment. • Collaboration on Health Technology Assessment at European level has had a long-lasting story and is now looking out into a new challenging era that will be the EU regulation being implemented.

OP303 Do You Get The Message? Making HTA Findings Easier For Decision-Makers To Implement

IntroductionOften health technology assessment (HTA) products developed by the Scottish Health Technologies Group (SHTG) did not reach clear directive conclusions because the evidence base for a technology was weak. Despite being methodologically robust, these products did not meet the needs of decision-makers and may have had negligible impact.MethodsSHTG set out to equip and empower the recommendation-making council (that is, appraisal committee) to reach clear conclusions. SHTG broadened the HTA components and types of evidence that could be considered. The increased breadth of evidence included: clinicians attending council meetings to respond to questions; patient groups making submissions and presenting at council meetings; Scotland-specific economic modelling; and consultation on draft recommendations. SHTG also restructured the council for improved deliberative decision-making.ResultsClear directive conclusions were reached in a substantially higher proportion of HTA products (eighty-eight percent in 2019 compared with eight percent in 2017). It became possible for decision-makers to implement findings. It also became feasible to assess the impact and implementation of recommendations.ConclusionsBroadening SHTG's consideration of HTA components has led to a clearer conclusion being reached and stronger messaging for decision makers. This positions SHTG to increase its influence in the use of health technologies in Scotland.

Information specialist collaboration in Europe: Collaborative methods, processes and infrastructure through EUnetHTA-CORRIGENDUM.

The history of European health technology assessment (HTA) goes back more than 30 years. Almost as old as HTA agencies themselves is the desire to achieve European collaboration. This gained further impetus with the establishment of the European Network of Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) in 2006. In this context, the field of information management faced specific challenges. Although these services are an integral part of HTA and information specialists play a key role here, this field is often not adequately represented in the HTA agencies within EUnetHTA. Furthermore, the organization of HTA production, including the types of HTAs produced, as well as funding, varies considerably. In order to meet these different conditions, information specialists have created various products and defined processes. With the EUnetHTA guideline, a common methodological understanding for the production of rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessments now exists. Furthermore, the Standard Operating Procedures map the complex information retrieval processes within EUnetHTA in a hands-on manner. The newly established Information Specialist Network (ISN) will in future ensure that information specialists are involved in all EUnetHTA assessments and that the methods are applied consistently in all assessments. In addition, the steering committee of the ISN manages enquiries and can be contacted to discuss methodological issues. Major barriers such as heterogeneity in the daily work of the EUnetHTA members can only be overcome through more collaboration and training.

Information specialist collaboration in Europe: collaborative methods, processes, and infrastructure through EUnetHTA.

The history of European health technology assessment (HTA) goes back more than 30 years. Almost as old as HTA agencies themselves is the desire to achieve European collaboration. This gained further impetus with the establishment of the European Network of Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) in 2006. In this context, the field of information management faced specific challenges. Although these services are an integral part of HTA and information specialists play a key role here, this field is often not adequately represented in the HTA agencies within EUnetHTA. Furthermore, the organization of HTA production, including the types of HTAs produced, as well as funding, varies considerably. In order to meet these different conditions, information specialists have created various products and defined processes. With the EUnetHTA guideline, a common methodological understanding for the production of rapid Relative Effectiveness Assessments now exists. Furthermore, the Standard Operating Procedures map the complex information retrieval processes within EUnetHTA in a hands-on manner. The newly established Information Specialist Network (ISN) will in future ensure that information specialists are involved in all EUnetHTA assessments and that the methods are applied consistently in all assessments. In addition, the steering committee of the ISN manages enquiries and can be contacted to discuss methodological issues. Major barriers such as heterogeneity in the daily work of the EUnetHTA members can only be overcome through more collaboration and training.

Using health technology assessment for better healthcare decisions.

Canadian health leaders can benefit from greater involvement in the design and production of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) through enhanced working relationships with HTA producers. The HTA producers and health leaders have a shared interest in the appropriate use of pharmaceuticals, healthcare devices, and procedures which benefit patients and support sustainable health systems. This article highlights the shared responsibility of HTA producers and decision makers in the appropriate use of these healthcare interventions through an examination of a HTA-informed policy and practice change in the management diabetes in elderly residents in long-term care settings. Consideration is given to the role of the co-responsibility model and LEADS in a Caring Environment framework (LEADS) in helping to facilitate partnerships between decision-makers and HTA producers in the realization of HTA-informed policy and practice.

Toward a Strategy to Involve Patients in Health Technology Assessment in Spain.

The aim of this study was to develop a feasible and effective strategy to involve patients in the Spanish Network of Agencies of Health Technology Assessment (RedETS). The framework for patient involvement (PI) in the assessment activities and processes of RedETS were developed through a research project that included: (i) a systematic search of the international literature describing a strategy and/or a methodology linking health technology assessment (HTA) and PI; (ii) a qualitative study through interviews with RedETS members to analyze the perceptions of PI among HTA managers in the Spanish context; (iii) a Delphi consultation with three large platforms of patients, carers and consumer organizations in Spain about their perspectives of PI; (iv) a consensus process with the members of the RedETS Governing Council to define the final strategy. Three main themes were identified in the literature and Web site review: (i) PI methods for the different HTA phases; (ii) Participant definition and selection; (iii) Resources needed. A three-step implementation strategy was proposed: (i) short-term actions: piloting and testing patient participation in HTA and building patients' capacity; (ii) medium-term actions: broadening the participation of patients, and building internal capacity; (iii) long-term actions: consolidating and mainstreaming patient involvement CONCLUSIONS: Patient participation can be incorporated into almost all the HTA phases and products with greater or lesser degrees of difficulty. However, a progressive implementation strategy is suggested for a feasible PI process.

HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT FOR DECISION MAKING IN LATIN AMERICA: GOOD PRACTICE PRINCIPLES.

The aim of this study was to identify good practice principles for health technology assessment (HTA) that are the most relevant and of highest priority for application in Latin America and to identify potential barriers to their implementation in the region. HTA good practice principles proposed at the international level were identified and then explored during a deliberative process in a forum of assessors, funders, and product manufacturers. Forty-two representatives from ten Latin American countries participated. Good practice principles proposed at the international level were considered valid and potentially relevant to Latin America. Five principles were identified as priority and with the greatest potential to be strengthened at this time: transparency in the production of HTA, involvement of relevant stakeholders in the HTA process, mechanisms to appeal decisions, clear priority-setting processes in HTA, and a clear link between HTA and decision making. The main challenge identified was to find a balance between the application of these principles and the available resources in a way that would not detract from the production of reports and adaptation to the needs of decision makers. The main recommendation was to progress gradually in strengthening HTA and its link to decision making by developing appropriate processes for each country, without trying to impose, in the short-term, standards taken from examples at the international level without adequate adaptation of these to local contexts.

PP145 Using Health Technology Assessment To Drive Guideline Development

Introduction:Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) are a key vehicle for converting evidence into action. CPGs can be produced by various methods: de novo, adaptation, adoption, or a combination of these. Deciding whether and how to develop a guideline can be challenging. Health technology assessment (HTA) researchers from the Institute of Health Economics developed a multi-step decisional algorithm highlighting the decision nodes in the initial phase of guideline development where HTA products and expertise can be valuable in demystifying these decisions.Methods:A literature search was conducted for articles comparing methods of developing CPGs, with particular focus on finding a priori criteria for deciding when to use one method versus another.Results:The published literature is sparse and there are no specific criteria available for deciding when to use one method of development versus another. The proposed multi-step algorithm identifies similar steps in the production of all types of CPGs: the set-up phase; establishing the need for a new CPG in consultation with a guideline development group and local stakeholders; developing research question(s); conducting searches for suitable existing guidelines; and finalizing the guideline. HTA can help set the health question(s) and identify and screen existing CPGs. When CPGs are not available, HTA methods are implemented to update the evidence in a blend of de novo and adaptation processes by reviewing umbrella reviews, systematic reviews, and primary studies. Quality appraisal of existing guidelines and syntheses of evidence in a rapid review fashion help determine whether there are enough studies to support the guideline scope.Conclusions:Deciding which method of guideline development to employ requires ample methodological expertise, an intimate knowledge of the clinical practice environment, and access to detailed contextual information. The proposed multi-step algorithm shows how to successfully leverage HTA resources to support CPG production and move research evidence into practice.

STAKEHOLDER INVOLVEMENT IN THE HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT PROCESS IN LATIN AMERICA

Latin American countries are taking important steps to expand and strengthen universal health coverage, and health technology assessment (HTA) has an increasingly prominent role in this process. Participation of all relevant stakeholders has become a priority in this effort. Key issues in this area were discussed during the 2017 Latin American Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Policy Forum. The Forum included forty-one participants from Latin American HTA agencies; public, social security, and private insurance sectors; and the pharmaceutical and medical device industry. A background paper and presentations by invited experts and Forum members supported discussions. This study presents a summary of these discussions. Stakeholder involvement in HTA remains inconsistently implemented in the region and few countries have established formal processes. Participants agreed that stakeholder involvement is key to improve the HTA process, but the form and timing of such improvements must be adapted to local contexts. The legitimization of both HTA and decision-making processes was identified as one of the main reasons to promote stakeholder involvement; but to be successful, the entire system of assessment and decision making must be properly staffed and organized, and certain basic conditions must be met, including transparency in the HTA process and a clear link between HTA and decision making. Participants suggested a need for establishing clear rules of participation in HTA that would protect HTA producers and decision makers from potentially distorting external influences. Such rules and mechanisms could help foster trust and credibility among stakeholders, supporting actual involvement in HTA processes.

VP10 Impact Of Health Technology Assessment On Policy And Clinical Decision Making In Korea

Introduction:Since established in 2009, the National Evidence-based healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA) has been the sole government-funded Health Technology Assessment (HTA) institution in Korea, yet little effort has been made to systematically evaluate the influence of its products. In this study, we aimed to measure the impact of the HTA products of NECA on clinical and policy decisions by introducing a systematic framework.Methods:We included HTA reports published from 2009 to 2015. Among the 141 research reports published during this period, there were 67 HTA reports. We gathered data on the influence by literature and news article search, review of administrative documents and directly listening to the decision makers. The influence was categorized into three decision types: changes in clinical guidelines, administrative decision on investment/disinvestment and healthcare policy making. Whether a research report was used directly in decision making, or followed by subsequent researches or round-table conference, was recorded to examine the knowledge transfer process.Results:In total, 67.2 percent of the included HTA reports were used to support clinical and policy decisions. Twenty-seven reports had influenced administrative decisions on investment/disinvestment. Ten provided evidence for new health policies or legislation. Eight were reflected in clinical guidelines. The impact of HTA reports published by NECA was more evident when the research was directly requested by decision-making bodies such as government institutions. Although most HTA reports were conducted in collaboration with clinicians, the use of results by clinicians was limited. Definitive results were more likely to be used, but reports with competing interests had fewer impacts.Conclusions:HTA by NECA had impacts on the rational use of healthcare resources in Korea, and NECA has established its role as an intermediary between governmental decision-making bodies and clinicians. However, more continuous approaches rather than one-time HTA research are needed for HTA on controversial topics to have impacts on decision making.

Decision-making frameworks and considerations for informing coverage decisions for healthcare interventions: a critical interpretive synthesis

ObjectiveTo guide decision-making about whether or not to pay for a new healthcare intervention, a number of existing frameworks systematically weigh scientific evidence, cost, and social and ethical values. Each framework has strengths and limitations. This study aims to review and summarize available frameworks and generate an integrated framework, if and where applicable, highlighting particular issues faced with expensive but effective and desirable healthcare interventions. Study Design and SettingWe conducted a critical interpretive synthesis to inform decision-making about healthcare interventions. We updated prior systematic reviews on decision-making frameworks through 2015. Purposive sampling identified relevant constructs and considerations to facilitate decision-making. ResultsOf 2,980 references, we purposively sampled 19 frameworks. The new framework, which built on the GRADE Evidence to Decision framework, included burden of disease, benefits and harms, values and preferences, resource use, equity, acceptability, and feasibility. Modifications to the Evidence to Decision framework included adding limitations of alternative technologies considerations in use (expanding benefits and harms) and broadening acceptability and feasibility constructs to include political and health system factors. No modifications appeared necessary to address the situation of effective but expensive and desirable interventions. ConclusionGuideline developers, health technology assessment producers, and decision-makers can use our integrated framework to inform decision-making about healthcare interventions.

PP141 Legal Governance: How Does Law Circumscribe The Social Role Of Health Technology Assessment?

INTRODUCTION:One of the barriers of integrating ethics in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) relates to the social role of HTA (1). The aim of this study is to provide a better understanding of the way by which law circumscribes the social role of HTA. Our hypothesis: HTA's social role is embedded within a mixed governance based on hard law and soft law.METHODS:Three HTA agencies were conveniently selected for our study: Haute Autorité de santé (HAS) (France), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) (United Kingdom) and Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (INESSS) (Québec, Canada). Our analysis of the legal, administrative and procedural documents relating to the existence and assessment processes of these three agencies is guided by the following criteria: 1.The normative strength of the documents (categories of hard law or soft law) (2)2.The definition of the agencies’ social role (1)3.The integration of ethics in the agencies’ mandate.RESULTS:Hard law contributes to establish a general mandate and some legal legitimacy for these agencies. Soft law, grounded in the HTA producers' practices, plays a major role in the legal governance of HTA. Our results demonstrate that these agencies existing practices seem to circumscribe their social role further than their constitutive laws. In this context, social actors become responsible to define, structure and operationalize the implementation of HTA.In addition, the legal framework (hard law) through which HTA unfolds does not clearly support its structural and social role. Despite existing legal frameworks, the normative legitimacy of HTA is not entirely established, as it depends on soft law. Taken altogether, this maintains a persisting conceptual vagueness in HTA governance.CONCLUSIONS:The social role of HTA should be defined either through modifying existing legislations (hard law) or through harmonization of the agencies internal policies and regulations (soft law). Such legal initiatives would help clarify the aims of HTA evaluations: assessments (scientific) or appraisal (value-laden), and therefore give a clearer indication on how best to integrate ethics in HTA.

OP77 Identifying Topics For Health Technology Assessment: The German “ThemenCheck Medizin”

INTRODUCTION:Clinicians, epidemiologists, economists and other non-medical professions are involved in the production of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) reports. In addition, patients or representatives from patient organizations, as well as the general public, are increasingly involved. In 2015 a new proposal process of topic selection for HTA reports was initiated by German legislation with the aim of more closely involving patients and the general public. The new process has been implemented by the Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) under the project title “ThemenCheck Medizin” (Topic Check Medicine).METHODS:Since July 2016, patients and the general public can propose topics for HTA reports to IQWiG, excluding topics on the assessment of drugs. The proposals are submitted via the IQWiG website www.themencheck-medizin.iqwig.de (available only in German). No specific expertize is required for the submission of a topic. On the basis of the proposals a selection committee (patient representatives appointed by patient organizations legitimized in Germany) choose up to fifteen topics deemed suitable for HTA reports. In 2017 the committe will be extended to include members of the general public. IQWiG makes the final decision on the selection of up to five topics per year for HTA reports.RESULTS:In the first proposal phase thirty proposals were submitted. The topics were allocated to the following categories: two for diagnostics; four for teeth; one for skin and hair; four for head and nerves; three for muscles, bones and joints; two for heart and circulation; four for cancer; two for children and adolescents; one for reproductive health and birth; and three for mental and emotional wellbeing. Four topics could not be considered because they either addressed the assessment of drugs or could not be transferred into an HTA question.CONCLUSIONS:Through “ThemenCheck Medizin” patients and the general public in Germany can actively be involved in the process of collecting proposals for HTA reports as well as in topic prioritization. The prerequisites for successful implementation were in particular the easy-to-use online form and IQWiG's support of persons submitting topics in their formulation of an HTA question. The integration of a selection committee of patient representatives was shown to be constructive and productive.

PP124 The HTAi Vortal: A Comparative Analysis

INTRODUCTION:The HTAi Vortal is a product of the HTAi Information Retrieval Group (IRG) which has collected resources in the field of Health Technology Assessment (HTA) since 2005.In 2011, a new technical platform was set up and the legacy Vortal content was split in three sections: HTA producers and networks, Selected references and Career development (including trainings). The same year, a fourth section was created to host a new product of the IRG: SuRe.info.In 2014, the Vortal added a new service to other Interest sub groups of HTAi: the hosting of “Custom bibliographies”. But while the Vortal was probably quite unique in 2005, other Websites have been developed since then to offer quite similar functionalities.The present communication aims at evaluating how the Vortal compares with similar tools existing on the Web.METHODS:Vortal competitors have been identified using a quick empirical search of the Web.Functionalities have been identified by testing the website or their archive; maintainers have been sometimes contacted to ask for complementary information. A grid listing all functionalities has been established and filled in with the collected information.RESULTS:Several competitors have been identified. The Vortal presents functionalities similar to online tools, but detailing level is different. Also, the Vortal provides a better integration resulting in more efficiency. And, the Vortal is the only Web platform to offer a service of publication of custom bibliographies to the different HTAi Interest Sub Groups.CONCLUSIONS:After 12 years of existence, the HTAi Vortal is still a recognized online resource about HTA. While some existing functionalities are to be found in other online tools, some remain unique to the Vortal. Further research is needed to evaluate the preferences of people with interest in HTA.

VP76 European Collaboration In Health Technology Assessment – Experiences And Possible Benefits

INTRODUCTION:Consistently high-quality health care is expected throughout Europe while concurrently, financial resources of member states are decreasing. National Health Technology Assessment (HTA) institutes are informing evidence-based reimbursement decisions in the national context, leading to redundancies in HTA production and tying up limited resources. Since 2006, the European Union project, the European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA) is aiming at enhancing the efficient use of HTA resources and facilitating transnational collaboration. Our aim is to present previous experience in joint assessment of medical devices. Furthermore, possible benefits of European collaboration for stakeholders will be discussed.METHODS:Processes and challenges of the completed EUnetHTA Joint Action (JA) 2 are summarized and discussed. Benefits, aims and opportunities of the ongoing EUnetHTA JA 3 are described.RESULTS:Six rapid assessments of medical devices, focusing on the assessment of effectiveness and safety, were published during EUnetHTA JA 2. Challenges in European medical device assessment encompass the choice of topics, the time point of assessments and the lack of European standards for systematic patient involvement. Characteristics of medical devices, like learning curves, call for monitoring them throughout their lifecycle.The benefit of European collaboration for stakeholders is manifold: uncertainty with regard to actual added value of a technology is minimized through Early Dialogues; harmonized and transparent assessment processes increase the quality of reports; work division among HTA organizations allows a resource-efficient assessment of a bigger amount of technologies; patient involvement ensures consideration of patient relevant endpoints.The importance of cross-border collaboration in HTA is shown in the continuation of the EUnetHTA project, which aims to sustainably strengthen international collaboration even after expiration of EU-funding.CONCLUSIONS:European collaboration in medical device assessment can ensure cross-border health care and efficient cooperation of national health systems. The focus should be set on a wide implementation of jointly established methods and quality standards. The European collaboration can lead to a concrete benefit for various stakeholders.

VP30 Research And Analysis Of European Health Technology Assessment Processes

INTRODUCTION:As part of the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) Joint Action 3, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in collaboration with forty-nine Health Technology Assessment (HTA) agencies and payer organizations, is leading on research to gain a high level understanding of HTA processes across Europe. This will help to facilitate improved collaboration and use of EUnetHTA HTA reports and tools across member states and decrease the duplication of work.To analyze the similarities and differences in HTA processes and decision making on the reimbursement of pharmaceuticals and medical devices across Europe.METHODS:National agencies involved in the HTA and reimbursement processes shared data on HTA and decision-making processes. Data provided was extracted into an excel workbook including information relating to pharmaceuticals, medical devices, inpatient and outpatient care and assessments that inform reimbursement, pricing and other processes.RESULTS:Thirty-one countries provided fifty-eight sets of HTA process and procedural documents for both medical devices and pharmaceuticals. This information was translated into the workbook which consisted of eleven sections (general information, capacity, overview of the process, topic selection, assessment process, advice and decision making, legal and procedural issues, reassessment, stakeholders engagement, HTA information used and HTA information held).The first stage of data analysis is a descriptive write up of existing processes from horizon scanning and topic selection up to decision making. The second stage is an analysis showing how collaboration and use of EUnetHTA outputs can be implemented into existing processes. An additional questionnaire will be developed to gain further understanding of EUnetHTA partners views on national engagement in the EUnetHTA procedures, implications of joint production, what EUnetHTA products are most valued and what mechanism might support better information sharing and more efficient use of HTA reports between jurisdictions.CONCLUSIONS:The analysis of the above data will provide detailed information on how EUnetHTA products or HTA products from other jurisdictions could be introduced into HTA and reimbursement processes across member states and at what point could EUnetHTA partners best engage in joint and cooperative work.