Are Health Technology Assessments Keeping Pace with Health Equity Priorities: A Review of Existing Approaches and Discussion of Emerging Practices
Main Article Content
Abstract
Health technology assessments are evaluation tools used by decision makers and governing bodies to evaluate the relative effectiveness, safety, and cost of new health technologies. Despite the significant access and reimbursement implications of the decisions informed by health technology assessments, health equity is not consistently included in these assessments. This review explores current health technology assessment approaches using global examples, examines how health technology assessments include health equity considerations, reviews how health equity is not optimally included in health technology assessments using a case study example, and discusses emerging practices to include more health equity related metrics using examples from sponsors and health technology assessment agencies. Results show that health technology assessments do not have a consistent, clearly defined measures of health equity impact or methods to include health equity-oriented measures in assessments. Additionally, most do not provide differentiated value assessments for health equity-oriented data or impact. However, innovators and health technology assessment organizations are presenting new approaches to evaluation. Some outside groups are advocating for change and investing in developing health equity checklists and frameworks for incorporation in health technology assessments. Moving forward, more research is needed to understand how to best incorporate heath equity-oriented measures into health technology assessments and how innovators can get more involved to inform both product development and evaluation efforts. If done well, health technology assessments can be developed to reward technologies and research programs that have a significant and measurable impact on delivering more equitable health outcomes.
Article Details
The Medical Research Archives grants authors the right to publish and reproduce the unrevised contribution in whole or in part at any time and in any form for any scholarly non-commercial purpose with the condition that all publications of the contribution include a full citation to the journal as published by the Medical Research Archives.
References
2. U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. CMS Framework for Health Equity. CMS.
3. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Office of Minority Health and Health Equity. Food and Drug Administration. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.fda.gov/about-fda/office-commissioner/office-minority-health-and-health-equity
4. Abersone I. Efficiency Versus Health Equity in Health Technology Decisions. Value & Outcomes Spotlight: A magazine for the global HEOR community. 2022;8(4):16-18.
5. Koziara K. Traditional HTAs keep diverse patients out of the conversation. Published December 7, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://catalyst.phrma.org/traditional-htas-keep-diverse-patients-out-of-the-conversation
6. World Health Organization. Cardiovascular disease. World Health Organization. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.who.int/health-topics/cardiovascular-diseases#tab=tab_1
7. World Health Organization. Health Technology Assessment Survey 2020/21. Health Technology Assessment - A visual summary. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.who.int/data/stories/health-technology-assessment-a-visual-summary
8. Oortwijn W, Broos P, Vondeling H, Banta D, Todorova L. Mapping of Health Technology Assessment in Selected Countries. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(4):424-434. doi:10.1017/S0266462313000469
9. Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care. The Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee Guidelines. About the Guidelines. Published September 1, 2016. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://pbac.pbs.gov.au/information/about-the-guidelines.html
10. Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency. Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada. 4th Ed. Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency; 2017. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/guidelines_for_the_economic_evaluation_of_health_technologies_canada_4th_ed.pdf
11. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Responsibilities and methods. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.g-ba.de/english/responsibilities-methods/
12. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Technology Assessment Program. Published February 1, 2023. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/ta/index.html
13. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE Health Technology Evaluations: The Manual.; 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg36/resources/nice-health-technology-evaluations-the-manual-pdf-72286779244741
14. Institutionalizing Health Technology Assessment Mechanisms: A How To Guide. World Health Organization; 2021. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/340722
15. Wang T, McAuslane N, Liberti L, Gardarsdottir H, Goettsch W, Leufkens H. Companies’ Health Technology Assessment Strategies and Practices in Australia, Canada, England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain: An Industry Metrics Study. Front Pharmacol. 2020;11:594549. doi:10.3389/fphar.2020.594549
16. Culyer AJ, Bombard Y. An Equity Framework for Health Technology Assessments. Med Decis Making. 2012;32(3):428-441. doi:10.1177/0272989X11426484
17. Ma C, Song Z, Zong Q. Urban-Rural Inequality of Opportunity in Health Care: Evidence from China. IJERPH. 2021;18(15):7792. doi:10.3390/ijerph18157792
18. Kanchanachitra C, Tangcharoensathien V. Health inequality across prefectures in Japan. The Lancet. 2017;390(10101):1471-1473. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(17)31792-0
19. Lippi G, Sanchis-Gomar F. Global epidemiology and future trends of heart failure. AME Med J. 2020;5:15-15. doi:10.21037/amj.2020.03.03
20. Iyngkaran P, Kangaharan N, Zimmet H, et al. Heart Failure in Minority Populations - Impediments to Optimal Treatment in Australian Aborigines. CCR. 2016;12(3):166-179. doi:10.2174/1573403X12666160606115034
21. Antipolis S. East and West Germany exhibit health disparities 30 years after reunification. The European Society of Cardiology. Published July 1, 2010. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.escardio.org/The-ESC/Press-Office/Press-releases/East-and-West-Germany-exhibit-health-disparities-30-years-after-reunification
22. Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee. Public Summary Document - November 2021 PBAC Meeting. Published online March 4, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.pbs.gov.au/industry/listing/elements/pbac-meetings/psd/2021-11/files/empagliflozin-psd-nov-2021.pdf
23. Canada’s Drug and Health Technology Agency. Empagliflozin (Jardiance). CJHT. 2022;2(11). doi:10.51731/cjht.2022.488
24. Gemeinsamer Bundesausschuss. Justification. Published online January 6, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.g-ba.de/downloads/40-1465-8161/2022-01-06_AM-RL-XII_Empagliflozin_D-704_TrG_EN.pdf
25. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Empagliflozin for treating chronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Published online 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ta773/resources/empagliflozin-for-treating-chronic-heart-failure-with-reduced-ejection-fraction-pdf-82611494690245
26. Partnership to Improve Patient Care. Aligning Health Technology Assessment with Efforts to Advance Health Equity. Published November 4, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. http://www.pipcpatients.org/resources/aligning-health-technology-assessment-with-efforts-to-advance-health-equity
27. Benkhalti M, Dagenais P. VP89 A Preliminary Equity Checklist To Support The HTA Process. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2019;35(S1):94-94. doi:10.1017/S0266462319003349
28. The Commonwealth Fund. Methods for Advancing Equity Goals in Health Technology Assessment. Grants. Published September 13, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://www.commonwealthfund.org/grants/methods-advancing-equity-goals-health-technology-assessment
29. Agboola F, Whittington MD, Pearson SD. Advancing Health Technology Assessment Methods that Support Health Equity. Published online March 15, 2023. Accessed March 22, 2023. https://icer.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/ICER_Advancing-Health-Technology-Assessment-Methods-that-Support-Health-Equity_03152023.pdf
30. National Council on Disability. Policy Brief: Alternatives to QALY-Based Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Determining the Value of Prescription Drugs and Other Health Interventions. Published online November 28, 2022. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Alternatives_to_the_QALY_508.pdf
31. Editorial Staff. Study Urges Caution Before Adopting ICER Reviews to Determine Cost Effectiveness of Treatments. Pioneer Institute Public Policy Research. Published January 24, 2019. Accessed March 1, 2023. https://pioneerinstitute.org/featured/study-urges-caution-before-adopting-icer-reviews-to-determine-cost-effectiveness-of-treatments/
32. Frank LB, Concannon TW. Inclusion In Health Technology Assessments: The First Step Toward Equity. Published online November 10, 2021. doi:10.1377/forefront.20211104.341669
33. Robinson JC, Tarricone R. Harmonization Of Health Technology Assessment Across The European Union: Lessons For The United States. Published online December 2, 2021. doi:10.1377/forefront.20211130.24462