IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0220131.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Health technology reassessment in the Brazilian public health system: Analysis of the current status

Author

Listed:
  • Viviane Cássia Pereira
  • Jorge Otávio Maia Barreto
  • Francisco Assis da Rocha Neves

Abstract

Background: The reassessment of technologies and services offered by healthcare systems is recent initiative and still without a widely adopted and evaluated method. To a better understanding of this process in Brazil, we have described the health technology reassessment (HTR) performed by the National Committee for Health Technology Incorporation (Conitec) into Brazilian public health system (SUS). Methods: A documental, exploratory, descriptive, retrospective study with qualitative-quantitative approach regarding the HTR performed by Conitec from January 2012 to November 2017. Results: After applying the criteria of inclusion and exclusion, we selected 47 technologies for this study. The vast majority of the demands (41 demands) came from the public sector, and only six from the private sector. Most of the requests referred to the exclusion of specific indication; followed by extension of use, withdraw of the technology from SUS, maintenance, and restriction of use. The dimensions of analysis found in the recommendation reports were scientific evidence on efficacy, effectiveness and safety, disease-related issues, issues related to the use of technology, costs, and social participation. However, these dimensions were not included in all analysis, and a standardized structure of the reports has not been observed. The most relevant decision factors considered for decision-making were efficacy, safety and use of the technology. Conclusion: During a six-year period of Conitec actuation, we could find some reassessments of technologies that are available in SUS. We observed that these activities had enabled progress, however, they are still not yet structured, with gaps in the selection process, and the assessment since no methodology and criteria for proper conduct were established.

Suggested Citation

  • Viviane Cássia Pereira & Jorge Otávio Maia Barreto & Francisco Assis da Rocha Neves, 2019. "Health technology reassessment in the Brazilian public health system: Analysis of the current status," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220131
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0220131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220131
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0220131&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0220131?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Livia Lovato Pires de Lemos & Augusto Afonso Guerra Júnior & Marisa Santos & Carlos Magliano & Isabela Diniz & Kathiaja Souza & Ramon Gonçalves Pereira & Juliana Alvares & Brian Godman & Marion Bennie, 2018. "The Assessment for Disinvestment of Intramuscular Interferon Beta for Relapsing-Remitting Multiple Sclerosis in Brazil," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 161-173, February.
    2. Bonny Parkinson & Catherine Sermet & Fiona Clement & Steffan Crausaz & Brian Godman & Sarah Garner & Moni Choudhury & Sallie-Anne Pearson & Rosalie Viney & Ruth Lopert & Adam Elshaug, 2015. "Disinvestment and Value-Based Purchasing Strategies for Pharmaceuticals: An International Review," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(9), pages 905-924, September.
    3. Kevin Marsh & Tereza Lanitis & David Neasham & Panagiotis Orfanos & Jaime Caro, 2014. "Assessing the Value of Healthcare Interventions Using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: A Review of the Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 345-365, April.
    4. Villa, Federico & Tutone, Michaela & Altamura, Gianluca & Antignani, Sara & Cangini, Agnese & Fortino, Ida & Melazzini, Mario & Trotta, Francesco & Tafuri, Giovanni & Jommi, Claudio, 2019. "Determinants of price negotiations for new drugs. The experience of the Italian Medicines Agency," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(6), pages 595-600.
    5. Maison, Patrick & Zanetti, Laura & Solesse, Anne & Bouvenot, Gilles & Massol, Jacques, 2013. "The public health benefit of medicines: How it has been assessed in France? The principles and results of five years’ experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 273-284.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Angelo Claudio Palozzo & Andrea Messori, 2016. "Comment on: “Disinvestment and Value-Based Purchasing Strategies for Pharmaceuticals: An International Review”," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 419-420, April.
    2. Safa Chabouh & Sondes Hammami & Hafedh Fessi & Abdellatif Achour, 2025. "Towards sustainable dialysis modality selection: a multi-expert fuzzy analytical hierarchy process based approach for guided decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 351(1), pages 779-807, August.
    3. Virginia Wiseman & Craig Mitton & Mary M. Doyle‐Waters & Tom Drake & Lesong Conteh & Anthony T. Newall & Obinna Onwujekwe & Stephen Jan, 2016. "Using Economic Evidence to Set Healthcare Priorities in Low‐Income and Lower‐Middle‐Income Countries: A Systematic Review of Methodological Frameworks," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(S1), pages 140-161, February.
    4. Peter Ghijben & Dennis Petrie & Silva Zavarsek & Gang Chen & Emily Lancsar, 2021. "Healthcare Funding Decisions and Real-World Benefits: Reducing Bias by Matching Untreated Patients," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(7), pages 741-756, July.
    5. Salah Ghabri & Jean-Michel Josselin & Benoît Le Maux, 2019. "Could or Should We Use MCDA in the French HTA Process?," Post-Print halshs-02319704, HAL.
    6. Angelis, Aris & Kanavos, Panos, 2017. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) for evaluating new medicines in Health Technology Assessment and beyond: The Advance Value Framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 137-156.
    7. Laura Grassi & Simone Fantaccini, 2022. "An overview of Fintech applications to solve the puzzle of health care funding: state-of-the-art in medical crowdfunding," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-27, December.
    8. Caimmi, Michele & Canali, Beatrice & Candelora, Laura & Di Costanzo, Alessandra & Fiorentino, Francesca & Vassallo, Chiara & Mancusi, Maria Luisa, 2025. "Price regulation and competition among on-patent anticancer drugs in Italy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    9. Sabine Vogler & Peter Schneider & Nina Zimmermann, 2019. "Evolution of Average European Medicine Prices: Implications for the Methodology of External Price Referencing," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 303-309, September.
    10. Jason C Hsu & Jia-Yu Lin & Peng-Chan Lin & Yang-Cheng Lee, 2019. "Comprehensive value assessment of drugs using a multi-criteria decision analysis: An example of targeted therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer treatment," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-17, December.
    11. Cuoghi, Kaio Guilherme & Leoneti, Alexandre Bevilacqua & Passador, João Luiz, 2022. "On the choice of public or private management models in the Brazilian Unified Health System (SUS)," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    12. Torkayesh, Ali Ebadi & Pamucar, Dragan & Ecer, Fatih & Chatterjee, Prasenjit, 2021. "An integrated BWM-LBWA-CoCoSo framework for evaluation of healthcare sectors in Eastern Europe," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    13. Sabine Vogler & Katharina Habimana & Manuel Alexander Haasis & Stefan Fischer, 2024. "Pricing, Procurement and Reimbursement Policies for Incentivizing Market Entry of Novel Antibiotics and Diagnostics: Learnings from 10 Countries Globally," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 629-652, September.
    14. Ivlev, Ilya & Vacek, Jakub & Kneppo, Peter, 2015. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for supporting the selection of medical devices under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(1), pages 216-228.
    15. Livio Garattini & Alessandro Curto, 2016. "Performance-Based Agreements in Italy: ‘Trendy Outcomes’ or Mere Illusions?," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 34(10), pages 967-969, October.
    16. Constanza Vargas & Richard Abreu Lourenco & Manuel Espinoza & Stephen Goodall, 2025. "Systematic Literature Review of Access Pathways to Drugs for Patients with Rare Diseases," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 23(2), pages 209-229, March.
    17. Claudio Jommi & Carlotta Galeone, 2023. "The Evaluation of Drug Innovativeness in Italy: Key Determinants and Internal Consistency," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 7(3), pages 373-381, May.
    18. Gregório, Beatriz Cagigal & Pereira, Miguel Alves & Costa, Ana Sara, 2024. "Multi-criteria decision-aiding for public hospitals: The role of interactions among pairs of access and quality criteria," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    19. Bratanova, Alexandra & Ford, Jerad A. & Schleiger, Emma, 2023. "Prioritising Investment Opportunities in Research and Development Using Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis," MPRA Paper 116458, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Rotteveel, A.H. & Reckers-Droog, V.T. & Lambooij, M.S. & de Wit, G.A. & van Exel, N.J.A., 2021. "Societal views in the Netherlands on active disinvestment of publicly funded healthcare interventions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 272(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0220131. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.