IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/her/chewps/2008-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A model for best practice HTA

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Haas

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Jane Hall

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Rosalie Viney

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Gisselle Gallego

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Stephen Goodall

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Richard Norman

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

  • Kees van Gool

    () (CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney)

Abstract

The aims of this paper are: to review and describe different approaches to HTA used in Australia and in other countries and to identify the features of best practice in HTA, particularly those likely to be most relevant to HTA at a local (ie state/regional) level. There are a number of well-developed models of HTA at the national and local levels. Most information about the operation of these models, particularly about the type and number of evaluations conducted, the recommendations/decisions made and the reasons for these is available for national processes, but there is much less readily available documentation about local level HTA. Most HTA processes that operate nationally and internationally can be categorised in one of three ways: guidance (provides structured information about appropriate technologies), mandatory (provides mandatory information about technologies to be implemented) and funding and implementation (provides structured evidence-based advice about which technologies should be implemented, the level of funding required to implement them and the source of these funds). The main factors which distinguish a high quality HTA process are that i) it is efficient in terms of setting priorities, the scope of the technologies to be assessed, avoidance of duplication and overall cost of the process, ii) the overall impact on utilisation and health budget is calculated as part of the HTA and iii) procedural justice occurs and is seen to occur; iv) it includes a comprehensive assessment of the impact on issues such as workforce, credentialing of providers and the ethical dimension of the technology; v) it influences decision making by being communicated appropriately and using trusted methods; vi) it influences adoption and diffusion of technology by ensuring that there is no diffusion prior to HTA, the results are incorporated into guidelines or recommendations, funding is linked to the decision, and remuneration arrangements and other characteristics of the HS facilitate the appropriate adoption and diffusion and vii) it influences health outcomes/efficiency/equity by ensuring that the methods and/or results are available and able to be used at a local level. Firm recommendations for an ideal system for HTA at the local level are not possible as much of the necessary information and evidence is not available about the strengths and weaknesses of HTA practices and processes currently in use. However, it is likely that the operation of a successful model of HTA at a local level would require the development of a central organizational unit, a process for implementing the results of HTA and, crucially, the building of capacity to support both types of activities. Additional expertise and skills will be required for both providers of HTA evaluations and for the commissioners and users of HTA.

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Haas & Jane Hall & Rosalie Viney & Gisselle Gallego & Stephen Goodall & Richard Norman & Kees van Gool, 2008. "A model for best practice HTA," Working Papers 2008/1, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
  • Handle: RePEc:her:chewps:2008/1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.chere.uts.edu.au/pdf/wp2008_1.pdf
    File Function: First version, March 2008
    Download Restriction: no

    More about this item

    Keywords

    health technology assessment; Australia; review;

    JEL classification:

    • I10 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Health - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:her:chewps:2008/1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Liz Chinchen). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/chusyau.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.