A NEW HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM FOR DEVICES: THE FIRST FIVE YEARS

Author:

Campbell Bruce,Dobson Lee,Higgins Joanne,Dillon Bernice,Marlow Mirella,Pomfrett Chris

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to review 5 years of activity from a new system devised by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), for assessing medical devices and diagnostics aimed at identifying and speeding adoption of technologies with clinical and cost advantages, compared with current practice in the United Kingdom healthcare system.Methods: All eligible notified technologies were classified using the Food and Drug Administration and Global Medical Device Nomenclature nomenclatures. Decisions about selecting technologies for full assessment to produce NICE recommendations were reviewed, along with the reasons given to companies for not selecting products.Results: Between 2009 and 2014, 186 technologies were notified (46 percent therapeutic and 54 percent diagnostic). Thirty-nine were judged ineligible (no regulatory approval), and 147 were considered by an independent committee. Of these, eighty (54 percent) were not selected for full assessment, most commonly because of insufficient evidence (86 percent): there were uncertainties specifically about benefits to the health service (54 percent), to patients (39 percent), and about cost (24 percent). The remaining 67 were selected and assessed for Medical Technology guidance (52 percent) (noninferior and/or lower cost consequences than current practice), for Diagnostics guidance (43 percent) or other NICE recommendations about adoption and use. Classifying technologies by two different systems showed no selection bias for any technology type or disease area.Conclusions: Identifying new or under-used devices and diagnostics with potential benefits and promoting their adoption is important to health services in the United Kingdom and worldwide. This new system offers a means of fostering both uptake and further research. Lack of research data on new products is a major obstacle to evaluation.

Publisher

Cambridge University Press (CUP)

Subject

Health Policy

Reference19 articles.

1. 1. Pomfrett CJD, Campbell B, Pugh PJ, Campbell M, Marlow M . Medical technologies evaluation II: Catalysing the development of primary clinical evidence for promising medical technologies. Proceedings of the HTAi 9th Annual Meeting Bilbao 25-27 June 2012. Gac. Sanit. 2012

2. 2. (Espec. Congr. 2):224.Poster 561. http://www.htai.org/fileadmin/HTAi_Files/Conferences/2012/2012_HTAi_Bilbao_Poster_Presentations.pdf (accessed August 28, 2015).

3. National Institute for Health & Care Excellence. MTAC membership [updated January 2016]. https://www.nice.org.uk/Get-Involved/Meetings-in-public/Medical-Technologies-Advisory-Committee/Members (accessed July 27, 2016).

4. National Institute for Health & Care Excellence. The MAGEC system for spinal lengthening in children with scoliosis. Medical Technology Guidance 18. [updated June 2014]. http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/mtg18 (accessed August 28, 2015).

5. National Institute for Health & Care Excellence. External Assessment Centre report template [cited 2015 Aug 28]. http://www.nice.org.uk/Media/Default/About/what-we-do/NICE-guidance/NICE-medical-technologies/MTEP-assessment-report.pdf (accessed August 28, 2015).

Cited by 12 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