IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v9y2011i5p331-347.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access

Author

Listed:
  • Maarten Ijzerman
  • Lotte Steuten

Abstract

Worldwide, billions of dollars are invested in medical product development and there is an increasing pressure to maximize the revenues of these investments. That is, governments need to be informed about the benefits of spending public resources, companies need more information to manage their product development portfolios and even universities may need to direct their research programmes in order to maximize societal benefits. Assuming that all medical products need to be adopted by the heavily regulated healthcare market at one point in time, it is worthwhile to look at the logic behind healthcare decision making, specifically, decisions on the coverage of medical products and decisions on the use of these products under competing and uncertain conditions. With the growing tension between leveraging economic growth through R&D spending on the one hand and stricter control of healthcare budgets on the other, several attempts have been made to apply the health technology assessment (HTA) methodology to earlier stages of technology development and implementation. For instance, horizon scanning was introduced to systematically assess emerging technologies in order to inform health policy. Others have introduced iterative economic evaluation, e.g. economic evaluations in earlier stages of clinical research. However, most of these methods are primarily intended to support governments in making decisions regarding potentially expensive new medical products. They do not really inform biomedical product developers on the probability of return on investment, nor do they inform about the market needs and specific requirements of technologies in development. It is precisely this aspect that increasingly receives attention, i.e. is it possible to use HTA tools and methods to inform biomedical product development and to anticipate further development and market access. Several methods have been used in previous decades, but have never been compiled in a comprehensive review. The main objective of this article was to provide an overview of previous work and methods in the field of early HTA, and to put these approaches in perspective through a conceptual framework introduced in this paper. A particular goal of the review was to familiarize decision makers with available techniques that can be employed in early-stage decision making, and to identify opportunities for further methodological growth in this emerging field of HTA. Copyright Adis Data Information BV 2011

Suggested Citation

  • Maarten Ijzerman & Lotte Steuten, 2011. "Early assessment of medical technologies to inform product development and market access," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(5), pages 331-347, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:9:y:2011:i:5:p:331-347
    DOI: 10.2165/11593380-000000000-00000
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2165/11593380-000000000-00000
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2165/11593380-000000000-00000?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hartmann, Marcus & Hassan, Ali, 2006. "Application of real options analysis for pharmaceutical R&D project valuation--Empirical results from a survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 343-354, April.
    2. Emily Lancsar & Jordan Louviere, 2008. "Conducting Discrete Choice Experiments to Inform Healthcare Decision Making," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 26(8), pages 661-677, August.
    3. Elisabeth Fenwick & Steve Palmer & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher & Keith Abrams & Alex Sutton, 2006. "An Iterative Bayesian Approach to Health Technology Assessment: Application to a Policy of Preoperative Optimization for Patients Undergoing Major Elective Surgery," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 26(5), pages 480-496, September.
    4. Bas Groot Koerkamp & Milton C. Weinstein & Theo Stijnen & M.H. Heijenbrok-Kal & M.G. Myriam Hunink, 2010. "Uncertainty and Patient Heterogeneity in Medical Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 30(2), pages 194-205, March.
    5. Tarn Driffield & Peter C. Smith, 2007. "A Real Options Approach to Watchful Waiting: Theory and an Illustration," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(2), pages 178-188, March.
    6. James E. Smith & Robert F. Nau, 1995. "Valuing Risky Projects: Option Pricing Theory and Decision Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(5), pages 795-816, May.
    7. J. Jaime Caro & Erik Nord & Uwe Siebert & Alistair McGuire & Maurice McGregor & David Henry & Gérard de Pouvourville & Vincenzo Atella & Peter Kolominsky‐Rabas, 2010. "The efficiency frontier approach to economic evaluation of health‐care interventions," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1117-1127, October.
    8. Laura Vallejo-Torres & Lotte Steuten & Bonny Parkinson & Alan J. Girling & Martin J. Buxton, 2011. "Integrating Health Economics Into the Product Development Cycle," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 31(4), pages 596-610, July.
    9. Arthur E. Attema & Anna K. Lugnér & Talitha L. Feenstra, 2010. "Investment in antiviral drugs: a real options approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1240-1254, October.
    10. Steuten, Lotte & Vallejo-Torres, Laura & Bastide, Philippe & Buxton, Martin, 2009. "Analysing uncertainty around costs of innovative medical technologies: The case of fibrin sealant (QUIXIL®) for total knee replacement," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 46-57, January.
    11. Susanne Hartz & Jürgen John, 2007. "The contribution of economic evaluation to decision-making in early phases of product development: a methodological and empirical review," Jena Economics Research Papers 2007-094, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    12. Wild, Claudia & Langer, Thomas, 2008. "Emerging health technologies: Informing and supporting health policy early," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 87(2), pages 160-171, August.
    13. Hartz, Susanne & John, Jürgen, 2009. "Public health policy decisions on medical innovations: What role can early economic evaluation play?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 184-192, February.
    14. Garthwaite, Paul H. & Kadane, Joseph B. & O'Hagan, Anthony, 2005. "Statistical Methods for Eliciting Probability Distributions," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 100, pages 680-701, June.
    15. Elisabeth Fenwick & Karl Claxton & Mark Sculpher, 2008. "The Value of Implementation and the Value of Information: Combined and Uneven Development," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 28(1), pages 21-32, January.
    16. Paolo Pertile & Emanuele Torri & Luciano Flor & Stefano Tardivo, 2009. "The timing of adoption of positron emission tomography: a real options approach," Health Care Management Science, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 217-227, September.
    17. DiMasi, Joseph A. & Hansen, Ronald W. & Grabowski, Henry G., 2003. "The price of innovation: new estimates of drug development costs," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 151-185, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wang, Yi & Rattanavipapong, Waranya & Teerawattananon, Yot, 2021. "Using health technology assessment to set priority, inform target product profiles, and design clinical study for health innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    2. Florian Methling & Steffen A. Borden & Deepak Veeraraghavan & Insa Sommer & Johannes Ulrich Siebert & Rüdiger von Nitzsch & Mark Seidler, 2022. "Supporting Innovation in Early-Stage Pharmaceutical Development Decisions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 337-353, December.
    3. Markiewicz, Katarzyna & van Til, Janine A. & Steuten, Lotte M.G. & IJzerman, Maarten J., 2016. "Commercial viability of medical devices using Headroom and return on investment calculation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 338-346.
    4. Esther A. Boudewijns & Thomas M. Otten & Mariam Gobianidze & Bram L. Ramaekers & Onno C. P. Schayck & Manuela A. Joore, 2023. "Headroom Analysis for Early Economic Evaluation: A Systematic Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 195-204, March.
    5. Yat Hang To & Koen Degeling & Suzanne Kosmider & Rachel Wong & Margaret Lee & Catherine Dunn & Grace Gard & Azim Jalali & Vanessa Wong & Maarten IJzerman & Peter Gibbs & Jeanne Tie, 2021. "Circulating Tumour DNA as a Potential Cost-Effective Biomarker to Reduce Adjuvant Chemotherapy Overtreatment in Stage II Colorectal Cancer," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 39(8), pages 953-964, August.
    6. Maarten J. IJzerman & Hendrik Koffijberg & Elisabeth Fenwick & Murray Krahn, 2017. "Emerging Use of Early Health Technology Assessment in Medical Product Development: A Scoping Review of the Literature," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 35(7), pages 727-740, July.
    7. Rowan Iskandar & Carlo Federici & Cassandra Berns & Carl Rudolf Blankart, 2022. "An approach to quantify parameter uncertainty in early assessment of novel health technologies," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(S1), pages 116-134, September.

    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. Erik Nord & Jose Luis Pinto & Jeff Richardson & Paul Menzel & Peter Ubel, 1999. "Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 25-39, February.
    2. Laura McCullagh & Cathal Walsh & Michael Barry, 2012. "Value-of-Information Analysis to Reduce Decision Uncertainty Associated with the Choice of Thromboprophylaxis after Total Hip Replacement in the Irish Healthcare Setting," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 30(10), pages 941-959, October.
    3. Lo Nigro, Giovanna & Morreale, Azzurra & Enea, Gianluca, 2014. "Open innovation: A real option to restore value to the biopharmaceutical R&D," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 183-193.
    4. Zapata, Juan C. & Reklaitis, Gintaras V., 2010. "Valuation of project portfolios: An endogenously discounted method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 206(3), pages 653-666, November.
    5. Shavit, Oren, 2009. "Utilization of health technologies--Do not look where there is a light; shine your light where there is a need to look!: Relating national health goals with resource allocation decision-making; illust," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(2-3), pages 268-275, October.
    6. Petra Marešová & Lukáš Peter & Jan Honegr & Lukáš Režný & Marek Penhaker & Martin Augustýnek & Hana Mohelská & Blanka Klímová & Kamil Kuča, 2020. "Complexity Stage Model of the Medical Device Development Based on Economic Evaluation—MedDee," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-27, February.
    7. Markiewicz, Katarzyna & van Til, Janine A. & Steuten, Lotte M.G. & IJzerman, Maarten J., 2016. "Commercial viability of medical devices using Headroom and return on investment calculation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 338-346.
    8. Sebastian Jaimungal & Yuri Lawryshyn, 2017. "Using managerial revenue and cost estimates to value early stage real option investments," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 259(1), pages 173-190, December.
    9. Guglielmo D’Amico & Giovanni Villani, 2021. "Valuation of R&D compound option using Markov chain approach," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 379-404, September.
    10. Meyer, Elisabeth & Rees, Ray, 2012. "Watchfully waiting: Medical intervention as an optimal investment decision," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 349-358.
    11. Jorge Tarifa-Fernández & Ana María Sánchez-Pérez & Salvador Cruz-Rambaud, 2019. "Internet of Things and Their Coming Perspectives: A Real Options Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-15, June.
    12. Maarten Ijzerman & Janine Til & John Bridges, 2012. "A Comparison of Analytic Hierarchy Process and Conjoint Analysis Methods in Assessing Treatment Alternatives for Stroke Rehabilitation," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 5(1), pages 45-56, March.
    13. Nishimura, Junichi & Okada, Yosuke, 2014. "R&D portfolios and pharmaceutical licensing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1250-1263.
    14. Fernandes, Glaucia & Perobelli, Fernanda Finotti Cordeiro & Brandão, Luiz Eduardo T., 2016. "A model for valuing new technologies under a pull incentives environment," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 482-493.
    15. Arthur E. Attema & Anna K. Lugnér & Talitha L. Feenstra, 2010. "Investment in antiviral drugs: a real options approach," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(10), pages 1240-1254, October.
    16. Hamill, Philip A. & McIlkenny, Philip & Opong, Kwaku K., 2013. "Valuation implications of pharmaceutical companies' R&D regulatory approval notifications," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(2), pages 99-111.
    17. Jiao Wang & Lima Zhao & Arnd Huchzermeier, 2021. "Operations‐Finance Interface in Risk Management: Research Evolution and Opportunities," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(2), pages 355-389, February.
    18. Joanna Coast & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Eileen J. Sutton & Susan A. Horrocks & A. Jane Vosper & Dawn R. Swancutt & Terry N. Flynn, 2012. "Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 730-741, June.
    19. Holger Patzelt & Dean A. Shepherd, 2009. "Strategic Entrepreneurship at Universities: Academic Entrepreneurs’ Assessment of Policy Programs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(1), pages 319-340, January.
    20. Patzelt, Holger & zu Knyphausen-Aufseß, Dodo & Fischer, Heiko T., 2009. "Upper echelons and portfolio strategies of venture capital firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(6), pages 558-572, November.

    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:spr:aphecp:v:9:y:2011:i:5:p:331-347. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.