Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erasmus School of Health Policy & Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands; Erasmus Choice Modelling Centre, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Value Health. 2019 Nov;22(11):1318-1328. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.04.1930. Epub 2019 Aug 3.
Integrating patient preferences in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is argued to improve uptake, adherence, and patient satisfaction. However, how to elicit and incorporate these preferences in HTA in a systematic and scientifically valid manner is subject to debate.
This article provides a systematic review of the challenges to integrating patient preferences in HTA that have been raised in the literature about patient preferences in HTA.
A systematic review of articles published between 2013 and 2017 addressing challenges to the integration of patient preferences in HTA was conducted in 7 databases. All issues with respect to the integration of patient preferences in HTA were extracted and divided into 5 categories: conceptual, normative, procedural, methodological, and practical issues. The issues were ranked according to how often they were mentioned.
Of 2147 retrieved articles, 67 were included in the analysis. Thirty-seven unique research issues were identified. In the majority of the articles, methodological issues were posed (82%), followed by procedural (73%), normative (51%), practical (24%), and conceptual (9%) issues. Frequently posed methodological issues concerned preference heterogeneity and choice of method. Common procedural issues concerned how to evaluate the impact of preference studies and their degree of being evidence based.
This article provides an overview of issues with respect to the integration of patient preferences in HTA procedures. Most issues were of a methodological or procedural nature; yet, the large number of different issues points to the overall importance of further researching the different aspects concerned with patient preferences in HTA. Through its ranking of how many articles mention particular issues, this article proposes an implicit research agenda.
将患者偏好纳入健康技术评估（HTA）被认为可以提高接受度、依从性和患者满意度。然而，如何以系统和科学有效的方式在 HTA 中引出和纳入这些偏好仍存在争议。
本文对 HTA 中纳入患者偏好所面临的挑战进行了系统综述，这些挑战在 HTA 中患者偏好的文献中被提出。
对 2013 年至 2017 年间发表的关于 HTA 中纳入患者偏好的挑战的文章进行了系统综述，在 7 个数据库中进行了检索。提取了与 HTA 中纳入患者偏好相关的所有问题，并分为 5 类：概念性、规范性、程序性、方法学和实践性问题。根据这些问题被提及的频率进行了排名。
从 2147 篇检索到的文章中，有 67 篇被纳入分析。共确定了 37 个独特的研究问题。在大多数文章中，提出了方法学问题（82%），其次是程序性问题（73%）、规范性问题（51%）、实践性问题（24%）和概念性问题（9%）。经常提出的方法学问题涉及偏好异质性和方法选择。常见的程序性问题涉及如何评估偏好研究的影响及其基于证据的程度。
本文概述了将患者偏好纳入 HTA 程序中所面临的问题。大多数问题都具有方法学或程序性性质；然而，不同问题的数量众多，表明需要进一步研究 HTA 中与患者偏好相关的不同方面。通过对有多少文章提到特定问题进行排名，本文提出了一个隐含的研究议程。
