Department for Health Evidence, Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Oct 19;11(10):2327-2336. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.159. Epub 2021 Nov 10.
Countries around the world are using health technology assessment (HTA) for health benefit package design. Evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) are a practical and stepwise approach to enhance legitimate health benefit package design based on deliberation between stakeholders to identify, reflect and learn about the meaning and importance of values, informed by evidence on these values. This paper reports on the development of practical guidance on EDPs, while the conceptual framework of EDPs is described in a companion paper.
The first guide on EDPs (2019) is further developed based on academic knowledge exchange, surveying 27 HTA bodies and 66 experts around the globe, and the implementation of EDPs in several countries. We present the revised steps of EDPs and how selected HTA bodies (in Australia, Brazil, Canada, France, Germany, Scotland, Thailand and the United Kingdom) organize key issues of legitimacy in their processes. This is based on a review of literature via PubMed and HTA bodies' websites.
HTA bodies around the globe vary considerable in how they address legitimacy (stakeholder involvement ideally through participation with deliberation; evidence-informed evaluation; transparency; and appeal) in their processes. While there is increased attention for improving legitimacy in decision-making processes, we found that the selected HTA bodies are still lacking or just starting to develop activities in this area. We provide recommendations on how HTA bodies can improve on this.
The design and implementation of EDPs is in its infancy. We call for a systematic analysis of experiences of a variety of countries, from which general principles on EDPs might subsequently be inferred.
世界各国都在使用健康技术评估(HTA)来设计健康福利套餐。循证审议程序(EDP)是一种实用的、逐步的方法,可以通过利益相关者之间的审议,根据这些价值观的证据,增强基于审议的合法健康福利套餐设计,从而识别、反映和了解价值观的意义和重要性。本文报告了循证审议程序实用指南的制定情况,而循证审议程序的概念框架在一篇相关论文中进行了描述。
在学术知识交流的基础上,进一步制定了第一版 EDP 指南(2019 年),对全球 27 个 HTA 机构和 66 名专家进行了调查,并在几个国家实施了 EDP。我们介绍了修订后的 EDP 步骤,以及澳大利亚、巴西、加拿大、法国、德国、苏格兰、泰国和英国等选定的 HTA 机构如何在其流程中组织合法性的关键问题。这是基于对文献的综述,包括 PubMed 和 HTA 机构的网站。
全球 HTA 机构在其流程中解决合法性问题(利益相关者的参与理想情况下是通过参与审议;证据为基础的评估;透明度;和上诉)的方式存在很大差异。尽管越来越关注改善决策过程的合法性,但我们发现,选定的 HTA 机构在这方面仍然缺乏或刚刚开始开展活动。我们提供了关于 HTA 机构如何改进这方面的建议。
EDP 的设计和实施仍处于起步阶段。我们呼吁对各种国家的经验进行系统分析,从中可以推断出 EDP 的一般原则。