Suppr超能文献

迈向波兰更透明的卫生技术评估流程:波兰卫生技术评估新方法指南

Towards a more transparent HTA process in Poland: new Polish HTA methodological guidelines.

作者信息

Lach Krzysztof, Dziwisz Michal, Rémuzat Cécile, Toumi Mondher

机构信息

Department of Pricing & Reimbursement and Market Access, Creativ-Ceutical, Cracow, Poland.

Department of Pricing & Reimbursement and Market Access, Creativ-Ceutical, Paris, France.

出版信息

J Mark Access Health Policy. 2017 Jul 26;5(1):1355202. doi: 10.1080/20016689.2017.1355202. eCollection 2017.

Abstract

: Health technology assessment (HTA) in Poland supports reimbursement decisions via the Polish HTA Agency (AOTMiT), whose guidelines were updated in 2016. : We identified key changes introduced by the update and, before guideline publication, analysed discrepancies between AOTMiT assessments and the submitting marketing authorisation holders (MAHs) to elucidate the context of the update. We compared the clarity and detail of the new guidelines versus those of the UK's National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). : The update specified more precise requirements for items such as indirect comparison or input data for economic modelling. Agency-MAH discrepancies relating to the subjects of the HTA update were found in 14.6% of published documents. The new Polish HTA guidelines were as clear and detailed as NICE's on topics such as assessing quality of evidence and economic modelling, but were less informative when describing (for example) pairwise meta-analysis. : The Polish HTA guidelines update demonstrates lessons learned from internal and external experiences. The new guidelines adhere more closely to UK HTA standards, being clearer and more informative. While the update is expected to reduce Agency-MAH discrepancies, there remain areas for development, such as providing templates to aid HTA submissions.

摘要

波兰的卫生技术评估(HTA)通过波兰卫生技术评估机构(AOTMiT)支持报销决策,该机构的指南于2016年进行了更新。我们确定了更新引入的关键变化,并在指南发布前,分析了AOTMiT评估与提交的药品上市许可持有人(MAHs)之间的差异,以阐明更新的背景。我们比较了新指南与英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)指南的清晰度和详细程度。更新对间接比较或经济建模的输入数据等项目规定了更精确的要求。在14.6%的已发布文件中发现了与HTA更新主题相关的机构 - 药品上市许可持有人差异。波兰新的HTA指南在评估证据质量和经济建模等主题上与NICE的指南一样清晰和详细,但在描述(例如)成对荟萃分析时信息较少。波兰HTA指南更新展示了从内部和外部经验中学到的教训。新指南更紧密地遵循英国HTA标准,更清晰且信息更丰富。虽然预计更新将减少机构 - 药品上市许可持有人之间的差异,但仍有发展空间,例如提供有助于HTA提交的模板。

相似文献

3
AOTMiT reimbursement recommendations compared to other HTA agencies.AOTMiT 的报销建议与其他 HTA 机构的比较。
Eur J Health Econ. 2024 Nov;25(8):1291-1310. doi: 10.1007/s10198-023-01655-x. Epub 2024 Jan 23.
5
A DECADE OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN POLAND.波兰的十年卫生技术评估。
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(3):350-357. doi: 10.1017/S0266462317000563. Epub 2017 Jul 19.

本文引用的文献

5
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目:PRISMA声明。
Ann Intern Med. 2009 Aug 18;151(4):264-9, W64. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135. Epub 2009 Jul 20.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验