Evaluation of the impact of patient input in health technology assessments at NICE

Author:

Livingstone HeidiORCID,Verdiel Vassilia,Crosbie Helen,Upadhyaya Sheela,Harris Kevin,Thomas LizzieORCID

Abstract

Abstract Objective Accounts of patient experiences are increasingly used in health technology assessment (HTA) processes. However, we know little about their impact on the decision-making process. This study aims to assess the level and the type of impact of patient input to highly specialised technologies (HSTs) and interventional procedures (IPs) guidance at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Methods A questionnaire was developed to capture quantitative and qualitative data on the amount and type of impact of patient input into NICE HTAs. It was completed by committee members of the guidance-producing programs after a discussion of the considered topics. The data were analyzed by topic and overall, for each program, and compared across programs. Results Patient input was assessed on ten pieces of HST guidance published between January 2015 and November 2019, and on twenty-six pieces of IP guidance scoped between February 2016 and October 2018. A total of 96 responses were collected for HST and 440 for IP. The level of impact of patient input was higher for HST than for IP. For HST, no respondents stated that it had no impact, whereas in IP, 35 percent of respondents did. The most common types of impact found for HST and IP were that it helped interpret the other evidence and that it provided new evidence. Conclusions The impact of patient input is not necessarily explicit in changing recommendations, but it provides context, reassurance, and new information to the committee for the decision-making process in HTAs.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy

Reference21 articles.

1. Introducing patients' and the public's perspectives to health technology assessment: A systematic review of international experiences

2. Co‐construction of health technology assessment recommendations with patients: An example with cardiac defibrillator replacement

3. 6. Values and Standards for Patient Involvement in HTA [Internet] [cited 2020 May 28]. Available from: https://htai.org/interest-groups/pcig/values-and-standards/.

4. What does meaningful look like? A qualitative study of patient engagement at the Pan-Canadian Oncology Drug Review: perspectives of reviewers and payers

5. 5. NICE highly specialised technologies guidance [Internet] [cited 2020 May 27]. Available from: https://www.nice.org.uk/About/What-we-do/Our-Programmes/NICE-guidance/NICE-highly-specialised-technologies-guidance.

Cited by 9 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3