International Network Of Agencies For Health Technology Assessment Research Articles

The international HTA database returned incomplete search results for NICE technology appraisals: An exploratory study and discussion of the implications

AbstractIntroductionThe International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) database offers a single point of access for identifying technology appraisals, in contrast to searching multiple websites directly. The aim of this research is to compare the coverage of the INAHTA and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) databases with direct searching on the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) website to identify Technology Appraisals published by NICE.MethodsNICE Technology Appraisals were downloaded from the NICE website (April 2022). Technology Appraisals were randomized and the first 20 Technology Appraisals constituted data for analysis. The INAHTA and CRD HTA databases were searched to determine if the 20 Technology Appraisals available on the NICE website were also available for retrieval.ResultsCoverage was incomplete. INAHTA: 15 of 20 Technology Appraisals (75%) were not identified via full title or intervention‐specific searches. CRD HTA: 7 of 12 Technology Appraisals (58%) that were published before the last update of the database were not identified.ConclusionFindings indicate that researchers seeking to identify NICE Technology Appraisals should search the NICE website directly. How this finding impacts identification of guidance from other agencies should be evaluated.

Drug clinical comprehensive evaluation of tetrandrine in the treatment of pneumoconiosis

Objective: To analyze the safety, effectiveness, economics, innovation, suitability and accessibility of tetrandrine in the treatment of pneumoconiosis, and provide evidence-based basis for health policy decision-making and clinical practice. Methods: In July 2022, the system searched PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, SinoMed databases (the retrieval time was from the establishment of the database to June 30, 2022), screened the documents that meet the standards, extracted and evaluated the data, and used the "HTA checklist" developed by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) to evaluate the HTA report. AMSTAR-2 Scale was used to evaluate the quality of systematic evaluation/Meta analysis. CHEERS Scale was used to evaluate the quality of pharmacoeconomics research. The included cohort study or case-control study was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The included randomized controlled trial (RCT) studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk Bias Assessment Tool (Cochrane RCT) quality evaluation criteria. Comprehensive comparison and analysis based on the characteristics of the data included in the study. Results: A total of 882 related literatures were detected from the initial screening. According to relevant standards, 8 RCT studies were finally selected for analysis. Statistical results showed that basic treatment with tetrandrine could better improve FEV(1) (MD=0.13, 95%CI: 0.06-0.20, P<0.001), FEV(1)/FVC (MD=4.48, 95%CI: 0.61-8.35, P=0.02) and clinical treatment efficiency. Tetrandrine had a low incidence of adverse reactions. The affordability coefficient of tetrandrine tablets was 0.295-0.492. Conclusion: Tetrandrine can improve the clinical symptoms and pulmonary ventilation function of pneumoconiosis patients, most of the adverse reactions are mild, and the clinical application is safe.

HTA185 HTA Indexing in the Purpose-Built INAHTA and CRD HTA Databases

Both the international HTA database, hosted by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) Health Technology Assessment (HTA) database, hosted by University of York, were originally intended to provide a single point of access to guidance from leading HTA agencies. This research aims to determine the coverage of the INAHTA and CRD HTA databases by comparing searches for NICE technology assessment (TA) guidance in these databases to the availability of guidance on the NICE website.

Topic selection process in health technology assessment agencies around the world: a systematic review.

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the process for topic selection by health technology assessment (HTA) agencies around the world to provide the knowledge base for the improvement of topic selection frameworks in HTA agencies. A systematic search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE to identify papers up to February 2019. Gray literature was identified by screening the Web sites of HTA agencies on the nonprofit member list of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Data were extracted for each HTA agency and synthesized, with issues including general contextual information about each agency and the process of topic selection. Out of forty-nine nonprofit members of INAHTA, a total of seventeen HTA agencies with a framework for topic selection were identified from twenty-two included papers/documents. Multiple criteria were used for topic selection in all frameworks and agencies undertook multiple steps, which could include the specification of criteria for topic selection, identification of topics, short listing of potential topics, scoping of potential topics, scoring and ranking of potential topics, and deliberation and decision on final topics for HTA. Shortcomings were found in relation to methods of scoring and ranking as well as lack of monitoring and the evaluation of the process. Our study provides insights into the current practice of topic selection in HTA agencies. Multiple criteria decision analysis methodology appears highly relevant to these processes. A consensus approach for the development of methods of topic selection would be valuable for the HTA community.

OP316 Patients’ Testimonials In The National Committee For Health Technology Incorporation In Brazilian Public Health System (Conitec) Meetings

IntroductionThe Department of Management and Incorporation of Technologies and Innovation in Health (DGITIS) acts as Conitec's Executive Secretariat. Among its attributions, it promotes the public/patient involvement in the health technology assessment (HTA) process. Recently, Conitec has been working on the inclusion of patient's testimonials about their illness experience in the plenary sessions, that is, the monthly meeting where technologies are assessed.MethodsTo support the action of including patient reporting in Conitec's HTA process, DGITIS developed research on HTA agencies websites worldwide. The main criteria was the inclusion of patients’ reports in their Committee meetings. DGITIS contacted some of these agencies and requested a listserv question to the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) members. These findings supported the DGITIS for the inclusion of patient participation in Conitec's meetings, from the selection process to the actual participation.ResultsFor the Conitec's HTA process, the patients’ participation should occur in the prior session to the public consultation, guaranteeing the inclusion of their perspective since the recommendation process beginning. Hence, every demand for incorporation to be discussed at Conitec's meeting should be preceded by a public call for patients with the clinical condition. The DGITIS will also hold preparatory meetings, which will serve as moments for shared construction of knowledge and literacy.ConclusionsThe nomination process, so far, has been grounded as a consensus among the patients. Thus, Conitec acts as a mediator, connecting the involved stakeholders, in a way that they can autonomously organize themselves and indicate the main representative and an alternate one. With the inclusion of the patient's perspective in the Conitec's meeting, another form of patient participation was opened in the HTA process. Therefore, the consolidation of this participation space is feasible and contributes to enrich the Brazilian HTA process.

OP314 What Happened Next? Assessing Health Technology Assessment Impact In Scotland

IntroductionThe Scottish Health Technologies Group (SHTG) set out to assess the impact of HTA products. Two questions were posed: Does advice from SHTG have influence? How is SHTG advice used?MethodsSHTG adapted a tool developed by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). The INAHTA framework investigates indications of impact and categorizes outputs into levels of impact. Over three years, potential users of SHTG advice were contacted six to twelve months after advice was published and asked how the advice had been used. HTA outputs were categorized into the four levels of influence they achieved: ‘major influence’, ‘some influence’, ‘some consideration’ and ‘no known influence’.ResultsHTA products were found to have been used in four main ways: ‘informed discussion’, ‘referenced’, ‘informed policy’ or ‘directly informed practice’. Levels of influence had steadily increased over the three years assessed. The findings were well received by internal audiences, with particular interest in the various ways HTA recommendations had been used. There was also feedback about ‘marking our own homework’. These results have informed a new SHTG strategy and supported clear messaging around the value of HTA.ConclusionsSHTG has found a pragmatic, resource-light way to explore the impact of HTA outputs, which has proved valuable for driving strategy and messaging.

PDG33 Awareness and Consideration of Confidential Listing Agreements in Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation By Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Bodies

Use of confidential listing agreements is growing in Québec (Canada). This reality creates an additional challenge during medicine cost-effectiveness assessment by HTA bodies. The objectives are to briefly describe the nature of listing agreements and identify if other HTA organizations around the world are aware of such agreements and how they take it into consideration. A literature review was conducted to assess the nature of confidential negotiated agreements. Then, HTA bodies’ websites were consulted. HTA organizations were selected if their respective jurisdiction was deemed similar to the ‘consumer protection priorities and economic wealth' of Canada (previously identified by the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, PMPRB). Additionally, a short questionnaire was sent to members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) regarding confidential agreements. Discount rate agreements, average ranging from 20 to 29%, are the most common form of listing agreement reported in the literature. Eighteen countries or provinces were included in the analysis (either via the PMPRB criterion or via an answer to the INAHTA questionnaire). Two did not have confidential listing agreements. Eight of the remaining 16 HTA organizations (50%) were aware of the content of the agreement and redacted information in their public reporting of cost-effectiveness analysis. For the 8 organizations that didn't have access to the content, including INESSS, different strategies have been adopted to deal with this uncertainty. While some don't take it into consideration at all, most use sensitivity analysis or, based on an average discount, estimate a discounted price. Access to confidential listing agreements by HTA bodies would be ideal to increase the accuracy of cost-effectiveness analysis and optimize the interpretation of results by decision makers. If impossible, HTA organizations should explore different approaches to illustrate the impact of confidential agreements.

The representation of public values in health technology assessment to inform funding decisions: the case of Australia's national funding bodies.

Over the past few years, there has been an increasing recognition of the value of public involvement in health technology assessment (HTA) to ensure the legitimacy and fairness of public funding decisions [Street J, Stafinski T, Lopes E, Menon D. Defining the role of the public in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) and HTA-informed decision-making processes. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2020;36:87-95]. However, important challenges remain, in particular, how to reorient HTA to reflect public priorities. In a recent international survey of thirty HTA agencies conducted by the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA), public engagement in HTA was listed as one of the "Top 10" challenges for HTA agencies [O'Rourke B, Werko SS, Merlin T, Huang LY, Schuller T. The "Top 10" challenges for health technology assessment: INAHTA viewpoint. Int J Technol Assess. 2020;36:1-4].Historically, Australia has been at the forefront of the application of HTA for assessing the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of new health technologies to inform public funding decisions. However, current HTA processes in Australia lack meaningful public inputs. Using Australia as an example, we describe this important limitation and discuss the potential impact of this gap on the health system and future directions.

Demonstrating the influence of HTA: INAHTA member stories of HTA impact.

A central function of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies is the production of HTA reports to support evidence-informed policy and decision making. HTA agencies are interested in understanding the mechanisms of HTA impact, which can be understood as the influence or impact of HTA report findings on decision making at various levels of the health system. The members of the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA) meet at their annual Congress where impact story sharing is one important activity. This paper summarizes four stories of HTA impact that were finalists for the David Hailey Award for Best Impact Story.The methods to measure impact include: document review; claims analysis and review of reimbursement status; citation analysis; qualitative evaluation of stakeholders' views; and review of media response. HTA agency staff also observed changes in government activities and priorities based on the HTA. Impact assessment can provide information to improve the HTA process, for example, the value of patient and clinician engagement in the HTA process to better define the assessment question and literature reviews in a more holistic and balanced way.HTA reports produced by publicly funded HTA agencies are valued by health systems around the globe as they support decision making regarding the appropriate use, pricing, reimbursement, and disinvestment of health technologies. HTAs can also have a positive impact on information sharing between different levels of government and across stakeholder groups. These stories show how HTA can have a significant impact, irrespective of the health system and health technology being assessed.

Application of evidence-informed deliberative processes in health technology assessment in low- and middle-income countries.

Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes toward more legitimate decision making. A survey among members of the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA) showed that EDPs can also be relevant for countries that have not (yet) established such an agency. Therefore, we explored to what extent low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) applied the steps and elements stipulated in the EDP framework and their need for guidance. The survey among INAHTA members was slightly adapted to address LMIC context and sent to 416 experts identified through several HTA sources. The questions focused on contextual factors and the EDP steps (installation of an appraisal committee, selecting technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, communication and appeal). Data collection took place between 21 May and 1 September 2019. Descriptive statistics and qualitative analyses were used to summarize the findings. We received sixty-six meaningful responses from experts in thirty-two LMIC. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development are overall not present or only present to some extent. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, as well as communication and appeal. EDPs have the potential to provide steps for improving HTA processes. The results of this study can serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation of EDP application in the responding LMIC. This could support the countries in improving their processes and enhancing legitimate decision making when using HTA.

The new definition of health technology assessment: A milestone in international collaboration.

An international joint task group co-led by the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) and Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) has developed a new and internationally accepted definition of HTA. The task group, consisting of representatives of leading HTA networks, societies and global organizations, developed guiding principles for the process and followed an established consultation plan with the broader HTA community to develop the definition. The consensus achieved by the international joint task group brings the collective weight of the participating networks, societies, and organizations behind the new definition. The new definition of HTA is an historic achievement and it is offered to the current and emerging HTA world as a cornerstone reference for today and into the future.

The 'Top 10' Challenges for Health Technology Assessment: INAHTA Viewpoint.

The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) spans the globe as a network of 50 publicly-funded health technology assessment (HTA) agencies supporting health system decision making for 1.4 billion people in thirty countries. Agency members are non-profit HTA organizations that are part of, or directly support, regional or national governments. Recently, INAHTA surveyed its members to gather perspectives from agency leadership on the most important issues in HTA today. This paper describes the top 10 challenges identified by INAHTA members. Addressing these challenges requires a call for action from INAHTA member agencies and the many other actors involved in the HTA ecosystem. In opening this call for action, INAHTA will lead the way; however, a comprehensive undertaking from all players is needed to effectively address these challenges and to continue to evolve HTA in its role as a strong and effective contributor to health systems.

Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes by Health Technology Assessment Agencies Around the Globe

Background: Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) were recently introduced to guide health technology assessment (HTA) agencies to improve their processes towards more legitimate decision-making. The EDP framework provides guidance that covers the HTA process, ie, contextual factors, installation of an appraisal committee, selecting health technologies and criteria, assessment, appraisal, and communication and appeal. The aims of this study were to identify the level of use of EDPs by HTA agencies, identify their needs for guidance, and to learn about best practices. Methods: A questionnaire for an online survey was developed based on the EDP framework, consisting of elements that reflect each part of the framework. The survey was sent to members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Two weeks following the invitation, a reminder was sent. The data collection took place between September-December 2018. Results: Contact persons from 27 member agencies filled out the survey (response rate: 54%), of which 25 completed all questions. We found that contextual factors to support HTA development and the critical elements regarding conducting and reporting on HTA are overall in place. Respondents indicated that guidance was needed for specific elements related to selecting technologies and criteria, appraisal, and communication and appeal. With regard to best practices, the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE, UK) were most often mentioned. Conclusion: This is the first survey among HTA agencies regarding the use of EDPs and provides useful information for further developing a practical guide for HTA agencies around the globe. The results could support HTA agencies in improving their processes towards more legitimate decision-making, as they could serve as a baseline measurement for future monitoring and evaluation.

PP193 How Does HTA Address Social Expectations Now? An International Survey.

IntroductionAfter surveying its members on ethical issues (2003), the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) mandated its Ethics Working Group (2005) to reflect on the role of health technology assessment (HTA) organizations in meeting social expectations. Some aspects of these have since been clarified by two studies addressing either the official position of INAHTA's members or the publication authors. An international survey was carried out on the perception of HTA professionals’ expectations when producing HTA reports: how to fulfil HTA's social role, which value judgments should be made explicit and what should be the status of ethical analysis.MethodsA twenty-two question, web-based, anonymous survey was devised from our recent systematic review on the integration of ethics into HTA and carried from April to July 2018. The information on 328 HTA agencies/contact persons from seventy-five countries was collected from the website of INAHTA, Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi), the European Network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA), EuroScan International Network, the HTA Network of the Americas (RedETSA) and the HTA Network of Asia (HTAsiaLink), a 2015 World Health Organization survey, HTAi members, and our local HTA network (Québec, Canada).ResultsEighty-nine participants completed and submitted a finalized survey for a 27 percent participation rate representing thirty-three countries. Regarding how the HTA reports should fulfil their social role, our results showed that over 84 percent of the respondents agreed upon the necessity to address it to decision makers, patients and citizens. At a lower and more variable level, the same result was found about the necessity to make value judgements explicit in different sections of the report, including ethical analysis. This contrasts with the variability of responses obtained on the status of ethical analysis although an agreement on the expertise required was observed. Variability in the usefulness of patient, public or stakeholder participation was observed.ConclusionsAt the dawn of this decade, this study reveals high expectations on context-dependent decisions in HTA: the necessity to integrate the ‘explicitation’ of value judgements and systematic ethical analysis to fulfil HTA's social role.

Defining capacity building in the context of HTA: a proposal by the HTAi Scientific Development and Capacity Building Committee.

To develop a definition of "capacity building" relevant to Health Technology Assessment international (HTAi). A review of capacity building activities undertaken by HTAi members, members of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), and regional HTA networks was compared against general literature on capacity building definitions and frameworks. The findings were reviewed by the HTAi Scientific Development and Capacity Building Committee. Furthermore, the Executive Committee and Interest Groups of HTAi provided input on the draft final paper. The literature demonstrated the need for a definition of capacity building specific to HTA. In the context of HTAi, it was necessary for the definition to cover (i) the broadest range of HTA-related activities, (ii) multiple stakeholders involved in the HTA process, and (iii) the spectrum of activities that compose capacity building. We propose the following definition of HTA capacity building: The process by which individuals and organizations develop or strengthen abilities related to understanding, providing input to, conducting, or utilizing HTA for health policy and decision making, as well as, developing awareness and support in the environment within which HTA is being used. A definition of HTA-related capacity building that was intended to provide clarity about what this term means to HTAi was developed. As HTA is context-dependent, a need for further work to develop an operationalization "menu" relevant to the specific needs in which HTA is being used was identified.

Methods Assessing Sociocultural Aspects of Health Technologies: Results of a Literature Review.

Social and cultural aspects are rarely assessed in health technology assessments (HTA), despite being part of most HTA definitions. One hypothesis for the reason why they are hardly considered in HTA is that we lack relevant assessment methods. Accordingly, this review aims at providing an overview of methodological approaches to address social and cultural aspects related to health technologies in HTA. We conducted a comprehensive literature search by searching fourteen databases and a hand-search of two pertinent journals. Additionally, we sent a query to all member agencies of the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) asking them for methods they use to assess social and cultural aspects. A total of 125 publications met our inclusion criteria. We grouped the methodological approaches into checklists for experts, literature reviews, stakeholder participatory approaches, primary data collection methods, and combinations of methodological approaches. There is a wide variety of methods available for assessing social and cultural aspects of health technologies, some of which have been applied in HTA. The presented overview of the different approaches and their merits can facilitate the assessment of these aspects, and improve the knowledge regarding (potential) success and failure of the implementation of a health technology.

VP33 Pharmacoeconomic Submission Requirements: Africa Compared With England

IntroductionThe South African Pharmacoeconomic Submissions Guideline (SAPG) is currently voluntary for medicines in the private health sector but may become mandatory and more widely used under the proposed National Health Insurance system. To make recommendations on evidence generation and areas where the SAPG could be strengthened, the study compared the SAPG requirements with other African pharmacoeconomic guidelines and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Methods Guide (NICE MG).MethodsThe World Health Organisation, International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), HTA International, and the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research websites were consulted, and email requests sent to named individuals from retrieved source material. The European Network for HTA Core Model® (version 3.0) (the Model®) provided the evaluation and comparison framework, using three criteria: completely, partly or not completely requiring the same or similar information as the Model®.ResultsOf the forty-five countries identified, only Egypt had a publicly available pharmacoeconomic guideline (Egyptian Pharmacoeconomic Guideline (EPG)). The guidelines varied considerably in their intended audience, size and content. All three guidelines’ primary focus was the cost and economic evaluation, and health problem and current use domains. Safety, organisational, ethical and legal aspects were poorly covered by the SAPG and EPG guidelines (less than thirty percent of issues in each domain completely / partly covered). The SAPG completely or partly required the same or similar information in the Model® for thirty-nine percent of total issues, the EPG thirty-three percent and the NICE MG sixty-six percentConclusionsThe SAPG was not as comprehensive as the NICE MG and poorly covered some key aspects of HTAs, suggesting that the SAPG could be developed to be more informative for decision-makers. Evidence generation should focus on describing the health problem the technology is targeting and on evidence that can be synthesized into cost-effectiveness analyses.

Disinvestment in healthcare: an overview of HTA agencies and organizations activities at European level

BackgroundIn an era of a growing economic pressure for all health systems, the interest for “disinvestment” in healthcare increased. In this context, evidence based approaches such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA) are needed both to invest and to disinvest in health technologies. In order to investigate the extent of application of HTA in this field, methodological projects/frameworks, case studies, dissemination initiatives on disinvestment released by HTA agencies and organizations located in Europe were searched.MethodsIn July 2015, the websites of HTA agencies and organizations belonging to the European network for HTA (EUnetHTA) and the International Network of Agencies for HTA (INAHTA) were accessed and searched through the use of the term “disinvestment”. Retrieved deliverables were considered eligible if they reported methodological projects/frameworks, case studies and dissemination initiatives focused on disinvestment in healthcare.Results62 HTA agencies/organizations were accessed and eight methodological projects/frameworks, one case study and one dissemination initiative were found starting from 2007. With respect to methodological projects/frameworks, two were delivered in Austria, one in Italy, two in Spain and three in U.K. As for the case study and the dissemination initiative, both came from U.K. The majority of deliverables were aimed at making an overview of existing disinvestment approaches and at identifying challenges in their introduction.ConclusionsToday, in a healthcare context characterized by resource scarcity and increasing service demand, “disinvestment” from low-value services and reinvestment in high-value ones is a key strategy that may be supported by HTA. The lack of evaluation of technologies in use, in particular at the end of their lifecycle, may be due to the scant availability of frameworks and guidelines for identification and assessment of obsolete technologies that was shown by our work. Although several projects were carried out in different countries, most remain constrained to the field of research. Disinvestment is a relatively new concept in HTA that could pose challenges also from a methodological point of view. To tackle these challenges, it is necessary to construct experiences at international level with the aim to develop new methodological approaches to produce and grow evidence on disinvestment policies and practices.

OP37 Health Technology Assessment Impact Assessment: Barriers And Enablers Perceived By Members Of The International Network Of Agencies For Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA)

Introduction:Health technology assessment (HTA) agencies wish to ensure the impact of their HTAs. HTA impact assessment measures the influence of a HTA on decision-making and downstream to patient outcomes. Despite their potential to provide insights, the use of impact assessment frameworks by HTA agencies is limited. Understanding the underlying mechanisms of adopting HTA impact assessment frameworks is therefore important. Using a social cognitions lens, this study aims to provide insights into the enabling and hindering factors associated with the assessment of HTA impact by INAHTA members.Methods:Using an interpretive description design, this cross-sectional study used semi-structured interviews of INAHTA members to gain insight into attitudes, social support, self-efficacy, barriers, and intentions towards HTA impact assessment. Transcriptions were analyzed using a social cognitions lens by two researchers using a constant comparative method to identify themes.Results:Twenty-six of forty-seven INAHTA members participated. Preliminary results showed that interviewees most often perceived support for assessing impact from their ministry of health or from agency staff. Most interviewees noted challenges to measuring impact at the right time and a lack of human resources, methods, and tools as internal barriers. A lack of transparency and a limited impact assessment culture were perceived as the main external barriers. Interviewees reported feeling fairly confident in overcoming internal barriers, but were less confident in overcoming external barriers. Providing feedback for improvement to HTA processes and making achievements visible were the most frequently reported advantages of assessing impact, whereas its time consuming nature was the biggest disadvantage.Conclusions:This is the first study to use a social cognitions model to understand HTA impact assessment. Although the results of this convenience sample need to be interpreted with caution, they contribute knowledge on factors that facilitate and hinder agencies in the assessment of impact and illuminate opportunities for developing effective strategies to support HTA agencies in this area.

OP177 Identification Of Technologies Of No Or Low Added Value

Introduction:Health technology has no or low added value when it is harmful and/or is deemed to deliver limited health gain relative to its cost, representing inefficient health resource allocation. A joint effort by the Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) interest group (IG) on disinvestment and early awareness, the IG on ethics, the EuroScan network and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) is aiming to design a toolkit that could aid organizations and individuals considering disinvestment activities. We synthesized state of the art methods for identifying candidate technologies for disinvestment, and propose a framework for executing this task.Methods:We searched systematic reviews on disinvestment and compared the methods used for identifying potential candidates. A descriptive analysis was performed including sources of evidence used and methods for selection / filtration.Results:Ten systematic reviews were retrieved, and the methods of 29 disinvestment initiatives were compared. A new framework for identifying potential candidates was proposed which comprises seven basic approaches based on the wide definition of evidence provided by Lomas et al.; 11 triggers for disinvestment were adapted from Elshaug's proposal, and 13 methods for applying these triggers that were grouped in embedded and ad-hoc methods.Conclusions:Identification methods have been described in the literature, and have been tested in different contexts. Context is crucial in determining the ‘not to do’ practices as they are described in different sources.