Xie Xuanqian, Guo Jennifer, Schaink Alexis K, Guliyeva Kamilla, Li Chunmei, Ungar Wendy J
Health Technology Assessment Program, Ontario Health, 525 University Avenue, 5th Floor, Toronto, ON, M5G 2L3, Canada.
Program of Child Health Evaluative Sciences, Hospital for Sick Children Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2025 Mar;23(2):197-208. doi: 10.1007/s40258-024-00943-8. Epub 2025 Jan 16.
Health technology assessment (HTA) can be conducted at the national, provincial, or hospital level. Although provincial and hospital-based HTAs often focus on non-pharmaceutical interventions, budget impact analysis (BIA) methods for non-pharmaceutical interventions have received less attention in the literature.
We reviewed HTAs of non-pharmaceutical interventions published since 2015 by a Canadian provincial HTA agency, evaluating the characteristics and challenges of conducting a BIA.
We summarized the unique characteristics of BIAs for different categories of interventions, including surgery and other procedures, diagnostic or screening tests, therapeutic programs, and digital health technologies. We then discussed specific methodological and practical considerations for conducting a BIA of a surgical or other hospital-based procedure. Critical points for BIA methods include the following: (1) when estimating the size of a target population, healthcare system capacity must be accounted for, and historical volumes may offer more realistic figures than prevalence and incidence rates; (2) factors that affect the uptake of a new intervention include guideline recommendations, labor and infrastructure requirements for implementation, and the target population size; (3) when interpreting a budget impact that shows cost savings, analysts must address where the savings are generated from and whether they can be reallocated. Some of the considerations discussed may also apply to HTAs of pharmaceuticals.
When conducting a BIA of a non-pharmaceutical intervention, addressing these methodological considerations may help in better predicting the financial impact of the new intervention for the public payer and guide appropriate budget allocation for healthcare system planning.
卫生技术评估(HTA)可在国家、省级或医院层面开展。尽管省级和基于医院的卫生技术评估通常侧重于非药物干预措施,但非药物干预措施的预算影响分析(BIA)方法在文献中受到的关注较少。
我们回顾了加拿大一个省级卫生技术评估机构自2015年以来发布的非药物干预措施的卫生技术评估,评估进行预算影响分析的特点和挑战。
我们总结了不同类别干预措施(包括手术及其他程序、诊断或筛查测试、治疗方案和数字卫生技术)的预算影响分析的独特特征。然后,我们讨论了对手术或其他基于医院的程序进行预算影响分析时具体的方法和实际考量因素。预算影响分析方法的关键点包括:(1)在估计目标人群规模时,必须考虑医疗保健系统的能力,历史数据量可能比患病率和发病率提供更现实的数据;(2)影响新干预措施采用的因素包括指南建议、实施所需的劳动力和基础设施要求以及目标人群规模;(3)在解释显示成本节约的预算影响时,分析人员必须说明节约来自何处以及是否可以重新分配。所讨论的一些考量因素也可能适用于药物的卫生技术评估。
在对非药物干预措施进行预算影响分析时,考虑这些方法学因素可能有助于更好地预测新干预措施对公共支付方的财务影响,并为医疗保健系统规划指导适当的预算分配。