Reflections on the evolution of health technology assessment in Europe

Health Economics, Policy and Law

Volumn 7, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 25-45

  Sorenson, Corinna ^a   Chalkidou, Kalipso ^b  

^a LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS   (United Kingdom)

^b JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL DECISION MAKING; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; EUROPE; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; REIMBURSEMENT; SOCIAL CHANGE; SOCIAL EVOLUTION; SOCIAL SUPPORT; STRATEGIC PLANNING;

CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON; DECISION MAKING; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; ENGLAND; EUROPE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; FRANCE; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HEALTH POLICY; HUMANS; SWEDEN; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84855647896     PISSN: 17441331     EISSN: 1744134X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1744133111000296     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Appleby, J., N. Devlin, D. Parkin, M. Buxton and K. Chalkidou (2009), 'Searching for costeffectiveness thresholds in the NHS', Health Policy, 91(3): 239-245.
2. Abelson, J., M. Giacomini, P. Lehoux and F. Gauvin (2007), 'Bringing ''the public'' into health technology assessment and coverage policy decisions: from principle to practice', Health Policy, 82(1): 37-50. (Pubitemid 46610527)
3. Anell, A. and U. Persson (2005), 'Reimbursement and clinical guidance for pharmaceuticals in Sweden: do health economic evaluations support decision making?', European Journal of Health Economics, 6(3): 274-279. (Pubitemid 41643700)
4. Audit Commission (2005), Managing the Financial Implications of NICE Guidance, London: Audit Commission.
5. Bending, M.W., J. Hutton and C. McGrath (2010), 'Comparative- effectiveness versus cost-effectiveness: A comparison of the French and Scottish approaches to Single Technology Appraisal', ISPOR 15th Annual International Meeting, May 15-19th Atlanta, GA.
6. Brickwood, D. (2004), Implementation of NICE Guidance: an ABHI Perspective, London: Department of Health.
7. Bundesgesundheitsministerium (2008), Stellungnahme zur Methodik der Kosten-Nutzen- Bewertung von Arzneimitteln, http://www.bmg.bund.de/cln-169/nn- 1168258/SharedDocs/Standardartikel/DE/AZ/K/Glossar-Kosten-Nutez-Berwertung/ Stellungnahme.html. Bonn: Bundesgesundheitsministerium.
8. Caniard, E. (2002), Les recommandations de bonnes pratiqués: un outil de dialogue, de responsabilité et de diffusion de l'innovation, Saint-Denis: Haute Autorité de Santé
9. Chalkidou, K. (2009), Comparative Effectiveness Review within the U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, New York: The Commonwealth Fund.
10. Chalkidou, K., J. Lord, A. Fisher and P. Littlejohns (2008), 'Evidence-based decision making: when should we wait for more information?', Health Affairs, 27: 1642-1623.
11. Chalkidou, K., S. Tunis, R. Lopert, L. Rochaix, P. T. Sawicki, M. Nasser and B. Xerri (2009), 'Comparative effectiveness research and evidence-based health policy: experience from four countries', Milbank Quarterly, 87(2): 339-367.
12. Chevreul, K. and I. Durand-Zaleski (2009), 'HTA in coverage and reimbursement decisions in France: toward a new paradigm?', Euro Observer, 11(1): 5-6.
13. Chisholm, A., K. Briggs and J. Askham (2009), Not NICE: can PCTs Engage Patients and the Public in Commissioning New Health Technologies?, Oxford: Picker Institute Europe
14. Claxton, K. (2009), 'Innovation Review - The Value of Innovation', Presentation at Kennedy Workshop on NICE's Approach to Valuing Innovation, London, May 19.
15. Cookson, R., D. McDaid and A. Maynard (2001), 'Wrong SIGN, NICE mess: Is national guidance distorting allocation of resources', British Medical Journal, 323: 743-745. (Pubitemid 32929442)
16. Culyer, A. J. and J. Lomas (2006), 'Deliberative process and evidence-informed decision-making in health care: Do they work and how might be now', Evidence & Policy, 2(3): 357-371. (Pubitemid 44376997)
17. Department of Health (2009), Update of NICE Approved Cancer Drugs 2007/2008, London: Department of Health.
18. Department of Health (2010), Equity and Excellence: Liberating the NHS, London: The Stationary Office Limited.
19. Devlin, N. and D. Parkin (2004), 'Does NICE have a cost-effectiveness threshold and what other factors influence its decisions? A binary choice analysis', Health Economics, 13: 437-452. (Pubitemid 38660393)
20. Devlin, N., D. Parkin and M. Gold (2003), 'WHO evaluates NICE', British Medical Journal, 327: 1061-1062. (Pubitemid 37386703)
21. Drummond, M. (2009), 'More haste, less speed? The emerging practice of HTA in the United Kingdom', Euro Observer, 11(1): 9-10.
22. Drummond, M. F., J. S. Schwartz, B. Jonsson, B. R. Luce, P. J. Neumann, U. Siebert and S. D. SulliVan (2008), 'Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 24: 244-258. (Pubitemid 351950160)
23. Gerhardus, A. (2006), 'The role of HTA in German health care. Do we need impact objectives?', Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz, 49(3): 233-240. (Pubitemid 43880412)
24. Goddard, M., K. Hauk, A. Preker and P. Smith (2006), 'Priority-setting in health: a political economy perspective', Health Economics, Policy and Law, 1: 79-90.
25. Goodman, C. (2004), HTA 101: Introduction to Health Technology Assessment, Bethesda, MA: National Library of Medicine, National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology.
26. Haycox, A. (2008), 'Does NICE blight exist, and if so, why?', Pharmacoeconomics, 26(12): 987-989.
27. Hitchen, L. (2008), 'NICE recommendations have had little effect on multiple sclerosis services five years on', British Medical Journal, 337: a734.
28. Hughes, B. (2008), 'Payers' growing influence on R&D decision making', Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 7: 876-878.
29. Hutton, J., C. McGrath, J. Frybourg, M. Tremblay, E. Bramley-Harker and C. Henshall (2006), 'Framework for describing and classifying decision-making systems using technology assessment to determine the reimbursement of health technologies (fourth hurdle systems)', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22: 10-18. (Pubitemid 43376234)
30. IQWiG (2008), General Methods, http://www.iqwig.de/download/IQWiG- General-methods- V-3-0.pdf, Cologne: IQWiG.
31. IQWiG (2010a), http://www.iqwig.de/institute-for-quality-and-efficiency- in-health.2.en.html, Cologne:
32. IQWiG. IQWiG (2010b), IQWiG in Dialogue, http://www.iqwig.de/iqwig-in- dialogue.908.en.html, Cologne: IQWiG.
33. Jacob, R. and M. McGregor (1997), 'Assessing the impact of health technology assessment', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 13(1): 68-80. (Pubitemid 27138809)
34. Johnson, F. R. (2009), 'Moving the QALY forward or just stuck in traffic?', Value in Health, 12: S38-S39.
35. Kanavos, P., E. Nicod, S. Van den Aardweg and S. Pomedli (2010), 'The impact of health technology assessments: an international comparison', Euro Observer, 12(4): 1-6.
36. Kennedy, I. (2009), Appraising the Value of Innovation and Other Benefits: a Short Study for NICE, London: NICE.
37. Milewa, T. (2006), 'Health technology adoption and the politics of governance in the UK', Social Science and Medicine, 63: 3102-3112. (Pubitemid 44648503)
38. Milewa, T. and C. Barry (2005), 'Health policy and the politics of evidence', Social Policy and Administration, 39(3): 498-412.
39. Nasser, M. and P. Sawicki (2009), Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: Germany, New York: The Commonwealth Fund.
40. National Cancer Director (2006), Usage of Cancer Drugs Approved by NICE, London: Department of Health
41. National Health Authority (2007), Service to the Community (SERC): How to Take into Account other Dimensions Other than Medical in Practice?, Paris: National Health Authority
42. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2006a), NICE Implementation Uptake Report: Drugs for Obesity, http://www.nice.org.uk/ page.aspx?o5390757, London: NICE.
43. NICE (2006b), NICE Implementation Uptake Report: Cox II Selective Inhibitors, http://www.nice.org.uk/page.aspx?o5390760, London: NICE NICE (2008a), Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal, London: NICE.
44. NICE (2008b), Social Value Judgments: Principles for the Development of NICE Guidance, 2nd edn, London: NICE.
45. NICE (2009), Net Cost Estimate, Implementation Programme, London: NICE.
46. Oberlander, J., T. Marmor and L. Jacobs (1994), 'Rationing medical care: Rhetoric and reality in the regon health plan', Canadian Medical Association Journal, 164(1): 1583-1587.
47. Office of Technology Assessment OTA Legacy1996 ( Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, http://www.princeton.edu/,ota/
48. Oliver, A. and C. Sorenson (2009), 'The limitations and challenges to the economic evaluation of health technologies', in J. Costa-Font, C. Courbage and A. McGuire (eds), The Economics of New Health Technologies: Incentives, Organization, and Financing, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
49. Oliver, A., E. Mossialos and R. Robinson (2004), 'Health technology assessment and its influence on health-care priority setting', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 20(1): 1-10. (Pubitemid 38656956)
50. Olson, M. (1965), The Logic of Collective Action, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
51. Owen-Smith, A., J. Coast and J. DonoVan (2010), 'The usefulness of NICE guidance in practice: different perspectives of managers, clinicians, and patients', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 26(3): 317-322.
52. Patel, P., S. Roberts, K. Sparrowhawk and J. Ng Haing (2010), 'Evaluating comparative effectiveness research for oncology in the US: An analysis based on lessons from health technology assessment in Europe', ISPOR 15th Annual International Meeting, May 15-19th, Atlanta, GA.
53. Perleth, M., B. Gibis and B. Gohlen (2009), 'A short history of health technology assessment in Germany', International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25(S1): 112-119.
54. Persson, U. and J. Hjelmgren (2003), 'Health services need knowledge of how the public values health', Lakartidningen, 100(43): 3436-3437. (Pubitemid 37431210)
55. Raftery, J. (2010a), 'Should NICE's threshold range for cost per QALY be raised? No', British Medical Journal, 338: b185.
56. Raftery, J. (2010b), 'Multiple sclerosis risk sharing scheme: a costly failure', British Medical Journal, 340: c1672.
57. Rawlins, M. and A. Culyer (2004), 'National Institute for Clinical Excellence and its value judgements', British Medical Journal, 329: 224.
58. Rochaix, R. and B. Xerri (2009), National Authority for Health: France, New York: The Commonwealth Fund.
59. Schlozman, K. L. and J. T. Tierney (1986), Organized Interests and American Democracy, New York: Harper and Row.
60. Schmidt, H. and J. Kreis (2009), 'Lessons from abroad', Hastings Center Report, 39(6): 20-22.
61. Sheldon, T. A., N. Cullum, P. Dawson, A. Lankshear, K. Lawson, I. Watt, P. West, D. Wright and J. Wright (2004), 'What's the evidence that NICE guidance has been implemented? Results from a national evaluation using time series analysis, audit of patients' notes, and interviews', British Medical Journal, 329: 999.
62. Sorenson, C., R. Tarricone, M. Siebert and M. Drummond (2011), 'Applying health economics for policy decision making: do devices differ from drugs?', Europace, 13, Supplement 2: ii54-ii58.
63. Sorenson, C., M. Drummond and P. Kanavos (2008a), Ensuring Value for Money in Health Care: the Role of Health Technology Assessment in the European Union, Copenhagen: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.
64. Sorenson, C., M. Drummond, P. Kanavos and A. McGuire (2008b), National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE): How Does It Work and What Are the Implications for the US?, Reston, VA: National Pharmaceutical Council.
65. Straus, S. E. (2004), 'What has evidence based medicine does for us?', British Medical Journal, 329: 987-988. (Pubitemid 39486244)
66. Swedish Dental and Pharmaceutical Benefits Agency (2010), Developing the Pricing System for Pharmaceuticals Could Save Billions, http://www.tlv.se/in- english/news/developingthe- pricing-system-for-pharmaceuticals-could-save- billions/[13 April 2011]
67. Syrett, K. (2003), 'A technocratic fix to the ''legitimacy problem''? The Blair government and health care rationing in the United Kingdom', Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law, 28(4): 715-746. (Pubitemid 37012995)
68. Towse, A. (2009), 'Should NICE's threshold range for cost per QALY be raised? Yes', British Medical Journal, 338: b181.
69. Velasco-Garrido, M. and R. Busse (2005), Health Technology Assessment: an Introduction on Objectives, Role of Evidence, and Structure in Europe, Brussels: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.
70. Velasco-Garrido, M., F. B. Kristensen, C. P. Nielsen and R. Busse (2008), Health Technology Assessment and Health Policy-making in Europe: Current Status, Challenges and Potential, Copenhagen: European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies.
71. Williams, I. and S. Bryan (2007), 'Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health care resource allocation: a conceptual framework', Health Policy, 80: 135-143. (Pubitemid 44750286)