Health Technology Assessment Stakeholders Research Articles

Roadmap to Innovation of HTA Methods (IHTAM): insights from three case studies of quantitative methods.

A conceptual framework, called Innovation of Health Technology Assessment Methods (IHTAM), has been developed to facilitate the understanding of how to innovate methods of health technology assessment (HTA). However, the framework applicability has not been evaluated in practice. Hence, we aimed to explore framework applicability in three cases of method innovation that are part of the HTx project and to develop a roadmap to improve framework applicability. The IHTAM framework was applied to three cases of innovating HTA methods. We collected feedback from case study leaders and consortium members after a training session, an approximately 1-year follow-up of periodic case study meetings, and a general assembly meeting where innovation progresses of the three cases were reported through surveys and interviews. Feedback was then summarized using an open-coding technique. According to feedback, the framework provided a structured way of deliberation and helped to improve collaboration among HTA stakeholders. However, framework applicability could be improved if it was complemented by a roadmap with a loop structure to provide tailored guidance for different cases, and with items to elaborate actions to be taken by stakeholders. Accordingly, a 48-item roadmap was developed. The IHTAM framework was generally applicable to the three case studies. A roadmap, with loop structure and actionable items, could complement the framework, and may provide HTA stakeholders with tailored guidance on developing new methods. To further examine the framework applicability, we recommend stakeholders to apply the IHTAM framework and its roadmap in future practice.

Designing collaborations involving health technology assessment: discussions and recommendations from the 2024 health technology assessment international global policy forum.

Although collaboration is an intensive way of working together, it is essential for such efforts to achieve shared goals. Health technology assessment (HTA) is transdisciplinary and has an important history of collaboration, with collaboration featuring increasingly in the strategic plans of HTA bodies and stakeholders. Collaboration can be between HTA bodies and between HTA bodies and other stakeholders-most notably regulators but increasingly payers, patient and caregiver organizations, clinicians-clinical societies, and academia. The 2024 HTAi Global Policy Forum (GPF) discussed collaborations involving HTA bodies, reviewing existing and previous collaborations to see what has worked and what can be learned. Core discussion themes included: (i) determining the collaboration purpose is essential but may be dynamic, changing over time; (ii) choosing the collaboration topic takes time, requiring upfront investment and stakeholder mapping; (iii) inviting the right participants and treating them equally is important, including those who can impact HTA, those who will be impacted by HTA and those who bring new information; (iv) collaborations need clear governance, defined roles, responsibilities, metrics, and case study-pilots can be a useful operational model; (v) resourcing collaborations sustainably is a challenge-the time, people, and money required are often under-estimated; (vi) undertaking continual, iterative learning reviews ensures ongoing value and impact of collaborations. Recommendations for future work include the development of a "go/no-go" checklist to determine when collaboration is needed, supplemented with a set of "best practice" principles for establishing and working in collaborations involving HTA bodies.

Development of a framework and decision tool for the evaluation of health technologies based on surrogate endpoint evidence.

In the drive toward faster patient access to treatments, health technology assessment (HTA) agencies and payers are increasingly faced with reliance on evidence based on surrogate endpoints, increasing decision uncertainty. Despite the development of a small number of evaluation frameworks, there remains no consensus on the detailed methodology for handling surrogate endpoints in HTA practice. This research overviews the methods and findings of four empirical studies undertaken as part of COMED (Pushing the Boundaries of Cost and Outcome Analysis of Medical Technologies) program work package 2 with the aim of analyzing international HTA practice of the handling and considerations around the use of surrogate endpoint evidence. We have synthesized the findings of these empirical studies, in context of wider contemporary body of methodological and policy‐related literature on surrogate endpoints, to develop a web‐based decision tool to support HTA agencies and payers when faced with surrogate endpoint evidence. Our decision tool is intended for use by HTA agencies and their decision‐making committees together with the wider community of HTA stakeholders (including clinicians, patient groups, and healthcare manufacturers). Having developed this tool, we will monitor its use and we welcome feedback on its utility.

Understanding innovation of health technology assessment methods: the IHTAM framework.

Adequate methods are urgently needed to guarantee the good practice of health technology assessment (HTA) for technologies with novel properties. The aim of the study was to construct a conceptual framework to help understand the innovation of HTA methods (IHTAM). The construction of the IHTAM framework was based on two scoping reviews, one on the current practice of innovating methods, that is existing HTA frameworks, and one on theoretical foundations for innovating methods outside the HTA discipline. Both aimed to identify and synthesize concepts of innovation (i.e., innovation processes and roles of stakeholders in innovation). Using these concepts, the framework was developed in iterative brainstorming sessions and subsequent discussions with representatives from various stakeholder groups. The framework was constructed based on twenty documents on innovating HTA frameworks and fourteen guidelines from three scientific disciplines. It includes a generic innovation process consisting of three phases ("Identification," "Development," and "Implementation") and nine subphases. In the framework, three roles that HTA stakeholders can play in innovation ("Developers," "Practitioners," and "Beneficiaries") are defined, and a process on how the stakeholders innovate HTA methods is included. The IHTAM framework visualizes systematically which elements and stakeholders are important to the development and implementation of novel HTA methods. The framework could be used by all stakeholders involved in HTA innovation to learn how to engage dynamically and collaborate effectively throughout the innovation process. HTA stakeholders in practice have welcomed the framework, though additional testing of its applicability and acceptance is essential.

OP223 A Semi-Automated Process To Monitor The Clinical Development And Regulatory Approval Pathway Of Innovative Medicines

IntroductionEarly identification of innovative medicines is crucial for timely health technology assessment (HTA) and efficient patient access. The National Institute for Health Research Innovation Observatory (NIHRIO) identifies, monitors and notifies key HTA stakeholders in England of ‘technologies’ (innovative medicines) within three to five years of regulatory approval. Increasing numbers of innovative medicines and significant uncertainties in clinical and regulatory pathways are major challenges in the monitoring and notification process. An active monitoring framework using pre-defined predictive criteria has previously been developed. This framework provides a standardized and consistent process, but is highly resource-intensive, requiring manual review of individual records.MethodsUsing the previous active monitoring framework, a scoring matrix was calculated and used to prioritize individual technologies using available data in the NIHRIO database: estimated regulatory timelines, regulatory awards/designations, innovative medicine type (for example gene therapies) and clinical trial phase, completion dates and results. A threshold for automatic and manual reviewing of technologies was developed and tested by NIHRIO analysts.ResultsThe scoring system identified approximately ninety percent of technologies meeting the threshold for semi-automated reviewing. The review period for these technologies are set automatically according to predefined criteria depending on data availability. The review periods are updated automatically until the record reaches the threshold that triggers manual reviewing. The remaining ten percent had estimated regulatory timelines necessitating the need for manual reviewing and early engagement with companies to verify regulatory timelines and/or notify HTA stakeholders.ConclusionsPreliminary analysis indicates that each technology is routinely and automatically updated. The semi-automatic updating represents a significant improvement in the efficiency of the monitoring of the large volume of technologies on the NIHRIO database. Ongoing work is being undertaken to further refine, pilot and test the system.This project is funded by the NIHR [(HSRIC-2016-10009)/Innovation Observatory]. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

A Value Framework for the Assessment of Diagnostic Technologies: A Proposal Based on a Targeted Systematic Review and a Multistakeholder Deliberative Process in Latin America

Objectivesthere are very few value frameworks (VFs) to assess health technologies that are focused on diagnostic tests; they usually do not reflect a multistakeholder process; and they are all developed in high-income countries. Our project performed a targeted systematic review, with the objective of proposing an evidence-based, up-to-date VF informed by a multinational multistakeholder group working in the health technology assessment (HTA) space. Methods(1) A targeted systematic review, with the aim to identify existing VFs and their dimensions; and (2) generation a VF proposal through a mixed-methods, qualitative-quantitative approach. ResultsFrom 73 citations identified, 20 met our inclusion criteria and served to provide the initial list of dimensions for our VF. An initial list of criteria and subcriteria for a preliminary VF was proposed. After a full-day deliberative face-to-face meeting with 30 relevant stakeholders from seven Latin American countries and the United Kingdom, the final VF was defined, consisting of 15 criteria: five “essential or core,” six highly relevant, three moderately relevant, and one of low relevance. Barriers and facilitators of value assessment of diagnostic technologies were also discussed. ConclusionsWe propose a VF oriented to diagnostic technologies based on a targeted systematic review and a participatory process with key HTA stakeholders. It is the first to be produced in a lower and middle income setting but can also be potentially useful in other contexts aimed to assist decision-making processes with these particularly complex health technologies.

HTA Reshaping: Rethinking the Health Technology Assessment Framework in Portugal

Introduction: Health technology assessment (HTA) aims to provide decision makers with relevant data to make informed choices. Recent changes in the Portuguese HTA framework have altered substantially the assessment methodology with regard to economic evaluation, with potential impacts on access and process efficiency. The HTA Reshaping Project had as its main objective informing the debate on HTA in Portugal, thereby identifying improvement opportunities and solutions to the HTA framework that address future challenges. Methods: The project comprised several phases, i.e., (1) mapping and evaluation of different HTA frameworks across Europe, identifying best practices and key variables to consider in future frameworks; (2) conduction of in-depth interviews with relevant stakeholders (n = 11); and (3) development of 2 workshops – one with young professionals (n = 12) and another with relevant HTA stakeholders (n = 19) – to consolidate and further explore vital elements of HTA, aimed at brainstorming ideas and developing solutions to improve some of the most critical points, with a view to addressing future challenges. Results: The comparison of HTA frameworks showed that their purpose and sophistication vary across European countries. For example, the need for economic evidence is not unanimous, and reimbursement agreements vary considerably. Among the stakeholders interviewed there was a high level of agreement on priorities that should be addressed, e.g., expanding and creating national level registries and assuring patient participation throughout the HTA process. The possibility of using managed entry agreements to enhance patients’ access, applying multi-indication pricing for medicines with different therapeutic values per indication, and improvement of registry/system interoperability gathered a moderate level of agreement. Conclusions: The Portuguese HTA framework might be further adapted to upcoming challenges and should evolve to improve access to innovative therapies. There is still a long path towards the convergence of HTA frameworks in EU member states.

The most important facilitators and barriers to the use of Health Technology Assessment in Canada: a best–worst scaling approach

Background Health Technology Assessment (HTA), which can support public drug reimbursement decisions will play a core function in the planned national Pharmacare program in Canada. To address existing barriers to the use of HTA, these must be ranked in order of priority. The goal of this study was to access the relative importance of known facilitators and barriers to the use of HTA in the context of the Canadian health care system, with attention to differences between regions and stakeholder groups. Methods We used the best–worst scaling object case approach to elicit a quantitative ranking of a list of 20 facilitators and 22 barriers. A sample of 68 Canadian HTA stakeholders, including members of expert committees, decision/policymakers, researchers/academics, and others participated in the study. Their task was to identify the most important and the least important item in 12 sub-sets of five facilitators and 14 sub-sets of five barriers. Findings Relative Importance Scores derived via hierarchical Bayes analysis revealed relations, engagement, and contact between stakeholders as most important on both the barrier and facilitator sides. Other top-ranked facilitators included the availably of credible and relevant research. Other top-ranked barriers included inconsistencies in the evidence and limited generalizability. The availability of HTA guidelines did not rank highly on either side. The main limitation of the study was the challenge with reaching the relevant respondents; this was mitigated by involving the national HTA agency in the research. Conclusion Canadian stakeholders consider the relationships within the HTA network among the most important. Policies should focus on strengthening these relationships. Future research should focus on the connectivity and distribution of knowledge and power within the HTA network.

Toward a common understanding of competencies for health technology assessment: enhancing educational and training programs around the globe.

Depending on the health system context and the demands of relevant stakeholders in countries, the need, organizational structure, and prerequisites for enabling capacity building and development in health technology assessment (HTA) will vary. Core competencies are instrumental in this and include essential knowledge, skills, and attitudes (KSAs). They provide building blocks for delivering high-quality and effective practices of HTA. We aimed to systematically explore and develop an overview of the core competencies necessary for HTA. This study was conducted during 2016-19 using different methods in a structured manner. We drew concepts of KSAs from various literature sources, surveyed universities and HTA professionals, and conducted expert workshops to arrive at a common understanding of the required competencies. The terminology for KSAs defining competencies in HTA programs has been clarified. In addition, a list of competencies offered through different educational and training programs has been created. The surveys provided clarity on a common understanding of KSAs among HTA stakeholders. Thereafter, a set of competencies was described and classified according to the HTA domains. Our study shows that there is diversity in HTA programs offered by educational institutions. The content of the programs varies due to differences between countries regarding the level of HTA development and the need for HTA, including the understanding of what HTA is. The preparation of a competency checklist or a "menu" of options mirroring the diversity of HTA will ensure that the specific needs of the HTA community will be covered.

OP491 Beyond Horizon-Scanning And Early Identification Of Innovative Technologies – Development Of An Active Monitoring Framework

IntroductionWhile horizon-scanning systems aim to identify innovative and potentially disruptive health technologies in development, a key challenge is variation in information collation and tracking of the pace of change prior to regulatory approval. An active and efficient monitoring process is crucial for timely notification of health technology assessment (HTA) stakeholders to enhance faster market and patient access. The National Institute for Health Research Innovation Observatory (NIHRIO) identifies and notifies its key HTA stakeholders in England of technologies that are within three to five-year timeframe to regulatory approval. Regular review of each technology is required to meet this remit.MethodsA standardized monitoring framework was developed based on the knowledge and experience of the evidence synthesis specialists in NIHRIO, supplemented by literature to ensure consistency of setting review periods. This framework used predefined criteria that integrated the technology innovation (advanced therapies, orphan status, regulatory awards), trial data (phase, status, completion date, preliminary results) and estimated approval timelines obtained from the company or other sources (for example, press releases).ResultsThe framework has been piloted and early findings showed improved consistency in the monitoring process between different analysts. It ensures that each technology is reviewed at least once a year; review timelines are set at three, six, nine or twelve months based on the predefined criteria. Estimated timeframes obtained from the companies are used to triangulate and streamline review periods, improving efficiency of the monitoring process.ConclusionsFindings from the pilot work with the framework demonstrated improved consistency and efficiency of the technology monitoring process, which can be easily implemented to provide early awareness in an accurate and timely manner for HTA. This framework was designed using a systematic and transparent approach that integrated different data sources to set review periods. While most of the data used in defining the criteria are publicly available, commercially sensitive information provided by companies were also used which may not always be readily available. Implications for horizon-scanning organizations will be discussed.

OP283 A Pipeline Analysis Of Advanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) In Late-Stage Clinical Development

IntroductionAdvanced Therapy Medicinal Products (ATMPs) are innovative biologics (gene, cells and tissue-based products) with the potential to treat diseases with significant unmet clinical need. ATMPs pose distinct regulatory, health technology assessment (HTA) and patient access challenges, hence early identification and prioritization of ATMPs is now recognized as a key concern in England. The National Institute for Health Research Innovation Observatory (NIHRIO) uses a robust methodology to identify and monitor health technologies, including ATMPs that meet the remit of key HTA stakeholders in England. This analysis provides a global overview of the current ATMPs pipeline to administer useful insights for policymakers, funders and innovators.MethodsNIHRIO's database tracks pharmaceuticals from phase I/II onwards, but this analysis focuses on late-stage development. The database (N > 12,000 records) was filtered to identify potential ATMPs using a predefined criteria based on the European Medicine's Agency's classification. Each record is categorized by stage: ‘Active’, (with an estimated three years to European licence); ‘Monitoring’ (in development with no licence date); and ‘Finished’, (output produced/discontinued and no longer tracked). Subsequently, records in ‘Active’ and ‘Monitoring’ were examined further.ResultsAnalysis identified 636 ATMPs: five percent ‘Active’, 40 percent ‘Monitoring’ and 55 percent ‘Finished’. ATMPs in the Active/Monitoring stages included: gene therapies (52%), somatic cells (43%) and tissue-engineered products (5%). Of these, 40 percent were oncological with the majority targeting hematological cancers (lymphomas). Prevalent non-oncology areas included musculoskeletal (10%) and ophthalmology (8%). Over one-third of trials were phase IIs, with almost half of all trials were based in the US.ConclusionsThe overarching findings here indicate increasing development of the ATMP pipeline towards indications with significant unmet clinical need. In oncology, the high prevalence of hematological ATMPs is largely due to recent chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) innovation. In non-oncology areas, ATMP development is increasing due to advances in regenerative medicine. With a significant number of ATMPs projected to be licenced within three years, and many more in active late-stage trials, HTA bodies and health systems are challenged to prepare for the entry of these innovative therapies.

Ranking the Criteria Used in the Appraisal of Drugs for Reimbursement: A Stated Preferences Elicitation With Health Technology Assessment Stakeholders Across Jurisdictional Contexts

ObjectivesOur goal was to estimate the relative importance assigned to health technology assessment (HTA) criteria by stakeholders involved in the HTA process. HTA is an increasingly common framework used in the appraisal of drugs for public reimbursement. It identifies clinical, economic, social, and organizational criteria to be considered. The criteria can vary across jurisdictions and are typically appraised by multidisciplinary expert committees. Guidance on the relative weighing of criteria is often absent. MethodsWe elicited stakeholders’ preferences using a single-scenario discrete choice experiment and a best-worst scaling model with conviction scores to assess the weights assigned to selected criteria by HTA stakeholders. We recruited 111 HTA stakeholders across multiple jurisdictions, including members of expert committees, clinical and economic experts, patients, and public payer representatives. Each judged twelve hypothetical cancer drug profiles for suitability for public funding and identified which characteristics were best and worst. In addition to standard discrete choice experiment and best-worst scaling models, we estimated a hybrid model to obtain a ranking of criteria by importance they played in the appraisal. ResultsA strong clinical benefit proved the most important criterion, followed by cost considerations, presence of adverse events, and availability of other treatments. The importance of clinical benefit was moderated by unmet need, adverse events, and number of patients. ConclusionPolicymakers might want to consider providing an explicit weighing scheme, or moving to a 2-stage selection process with an assessment of the quality of clinical evidence as a gatekeeping step for a full HTA review.

IS THE EUNETHTA HTA CORE MODEL® FIT FOR PURPOSE? EVALUATION FROM AN INDUSTRY PERSPECTIVE.

The HTA Core Model® was developed to improve the transferability of health technology assessment (HTA) between settings. The model has been used by HTA agencies but is also of interest to manufacturers, for improving internal evidence generation and communicating with other HTA stakeholders. To establish if the model is fit for purpose from an industry perspective, the pharmaceutical company Roche, collaborating with the European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA), conducted an assessment of the model. A questionnaire was developed to evaluate all assessment elements in the HTA Core Model v2.0 for their usefulness in meeting payers' evidence needs and demonstrating value. The questionnaire was completed by country affiliate teams working in evidence generation and reimbursement submissions for pharmaceuticals. Survey results were discussed in workshops to ensure consistency and alignment between teams. The questionnaire was completed by six teams. An additional team from global pricing and market access participated in workshops. Model domains pertaining to the health problem and current technology use, technology description, clinical effectiveness, and economic value were considered most important because they meet payers' evidence needs. Overall, the model was considered useful to improve the efficiency of HTA evidence generation, share evidence internally, and communicate value to payers and HTA agencies. From an industry perspective, the HTA Core Model provides a useful framework and common terminology for efficient generation of transferable HTA evidence. The timeliness, efficiency, and transparency of HTA processes could be improved by a more standardized approach to HTA across settings.

Building Synergy between Regulatory and HTA Agencies beyond Processes and Procedures—Can We Effectively Align the Evidentiary Requirements? A Survey of Stakeholder Perceptions

ObjectivesTo evaluate the current practice of companies and agencies to assess the changes made in aligning regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) stakeholders; to identify areas of commonality of evidentiary requirements that could occur; and to identify strategic issues and trends of regulatory and HTA synergy. MethodsTwo separate questionnaires were developed to assess stakeholders’ perceptions on regulatory and HTA alignment, one for pharmaceutical companies and the other for regulatory and HTA agencies. The responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics. ResultsSeven regulatory and 8 HTA agencies from Australia, Canada, and Europe and 19 international companies developing innovative medicine responded to the survey. This study provided a snapshot of the current regulatory and HTA landscape. Changes made over the past 5 years were reflected in three main areas: there is an increasing interaction between regulatory and HTA agencies; current conditional regulatory approvals are not always linked with flexible HTA approaches; and companies are more supportive of joint scientific advice. Four types of evidentiary requirements were identified as building blocks for better alignment: acceptable primary end points, inclusion of an active comparator, use of patient-reported outcomes, and choice and use of surrogate end point. ConclusionsThe study showed that the gap between regulatory and HTA requirements has narrowed over the past 5 years. All respondents supported synergy between regulatory and HTA stakeholders, and the study provided several recommendations on how to further improve evidentiary alignment including the provision of joint scientific advice, which was rated as a key strategy by both agencies and companies.

LOCAL HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN CANADA: CURRENT STATE AND NEXT STEPS

Canada has witnessed expansion of the health technology assessment (HTA) infrastructure in the last 25 years. Local HTA entities at the hospital or regional level are emerging to assist decision makers in the acquisition, implementation, maintenance, and disinvestment of healthcare technologies. There is a need to facilitate collaboration and exchange of expertise and knowledge between these entities regarding the role of local HTA in Canada. In November 2013, the pan-Canadian Collaborative hosted a symposium, Hospital/Regional HTA: Local Evidence-based Decisions for Health Care Sustainability, bringing together over 60 HTA producers, researchers, stakeholders, and manufacturers involved in local HTA across Canada. The objective was to showcase the diversity of local HTA in Canada, while highlighting common gaps to be addressed. The Symposium focused on current practices in local HTA in Canada to support informed decision making, and opportunities for information sharing and provide equal access to timely evidence-based information to decision makers. The main themes included assessment of evidence for local HTA, contextualization, stakeholder engagement in local HTA, knowledge translation and impact of recommendations, and challenges and opportunities for local HTA. Local HTA in Canada complements HTAs conducted at the provincial and federal levels to improve the efficient and effective health service delivery in institutions or regions faced with limited resources. Some challenges faced by local HTA producers to influence hospital policies and clinical practice involve the engagement of healthcare professionals and potential lack of training and support necessary for the introduction of a new technology.

PCN8 - A Lesson Learnt from Avastin®: - Bevacizumab Induced Hypertension as a Predictive Biomarker of Patient Response in Overcoming Regulatory and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Hurdles

The high cost of VEGF-targeted anti-angiogenic therapies within a financially strained health-system, makes reimbursement decisions a potentially limiting factor for new compounds. Failure to demonstrate adequate clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness in HER-2 negative metastatic breast cancer resulted in significant regulatory and health technology assessment (HTA) challenges. There is increasing expectation for new drugs to have companion diagnostics that identify likely patient responders, with growing support for using biomarkers to inform treatment decisions The purpose of this study was to critically examine published literature on trials incorporating biomarkers related to VEGF inhibition across different cancer indications, to explore their value as predictive, prognostic, pharmacological or surrogate response biomarkers A search with a strict set of inclusion criteria was used to review the current literature. Information was gathered for 13 biomarkers that have been explored for anti-VEGF therapy and a database was compiled housing raw experimental data for comparison. Each biomarker was critically evaluated and ranked accordingly, to validate their potential as predictive, prognostic, pharmacodynamic and surrogate endpoint markers for bevacizumab-based therapies, with consideration for likely regulatory, clinical and payer acceptance. A total of 222 published studies were incorporated into the analysis. Plasma VEGF-A, PlGF and soluble VEGFR-1/VEGFR-2 demonstrated value as pharmacodynamic biomarkers with limited prognostic value. CECs and CA19-9 showed prognostic and predictive value under restricted indications. Blood pressure demonstrated superiority in its ability to predict response to bevacizumab. The evidence suggests the incorporation of biomarkers in clinical trial design must be tailored to the drug and the cancer indication to which the therapy is applied. The potential for blood pressure as a biomarker of response to bevacizumab has been highlighted. Bevacizumab-induced hypertension should therefore be considered as a key candidate for future biomarker-driven trials, increasing the likelihood of test-treatment acceptance by key regulatory and HTA stakeholders.

Introducing the patient's perspective in hospital health technology assessment (HTA): the views of HTA producers, hospital managers and patients

The recent establishment of health technology assessment (HTA) units in University hospitals in the Province of Quebec (Canada) provides a unique opportunity to foster increased participation of patients in decisions regarding health technologies and interventions at the local level. However, little is known about factors that influence whether the patient's perspective is taken into consideration when such decisions are made. To explore the practices, perceptions and views of the various HTA stakeholders concerning patient involvement in HTA at the local level. Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with 24 HTA producers and hospital managers and two focus groups with a total of 13 patient representatives. Patient representatives generally showed considerable interest in being involved in HTA. Our findings support the hypothesis that the patient perspective contributes to a more accurate and contextualized assessment of health technologies and produces HTA reports that are more useful for decision makers. They also suggest that participation throughout the assessment process could empower patients and improve their knowledge. Barriers to patient involvement in HTA at the local level are also discussed as well as potential strategies to overcome them. This study contributes to knowledge that could guide interventions in favour of patient participation in HTA activities at the local level. Experimenting with different patient involvement strategies and assessing their impact is needed to provide evidence that will inform future interventions of this kind.

Using health technology assessment to support evidence-based decision-making in Canada: an academic perspective

Health technology assessment (HTA) adopts a multidisciplinary approach to comprehensively assess safety, efficacy, effectiveness, economic and organizational impact, and any potential social and ethical implications associated with adoption and diffusion of a technology in a healthcare system. Canada was one of the first pioneers in using HTA as a research tool to support evidence-based decision-making. This article describes the current application of HTA in Canada, with a focus on some federal and Ontario initiatives in which the authors have extensive knowledge and experience to illustrate how academic researchers conduct HTA in collaboration with decision makers. Some issues and challenges are also highlighted that will hopefully stimulate a broader discussion among HTA stakeholders to move HTA forward.