Details descriptions of the session:
This will be an organized session on the concept of a deliberative process in health technology assessment (HTA). HTA deliberation is commonplace, yet the philosophy, structure, and outputs of deliberation vary widely across settings. Our session, which links to the “Seeing the Whole Picture” conference theme and the sub-theme of “From Principle To Practice: Ethical And Equitable Health Priority Setting”, will describe a set of principles and checklist for deliberation developed by a Health Technology Assessment International-International Society of Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (HTAi-ISPOR) joint task force, provide detailed examples of HTA deliberation in multiple settings with a focus on how well global deliberative principles have been followed, and discuss where differences in deliberative approach are warranted or might represent opportunities for empirical research on what works best.
Learning objectives and target audience:
- To educate attendees on the key principles and activities arising from the global taskforce effort;
- To understand both established and newer efforts to implement an HTA deliberative process, including how well they are working and level of adherence to published principles; and
- To review differences in the approach to HTA deliberation, and consider critically whether differences are warranted or require further investigation.
The target audience should include HTA practitioners, policymakers, and interested stakeholders who would like to understand how to institute a deliberative process in their local setting or what areas of existing deliberation to consider refining.
Structure of presentation:
The session will be moderated by Dan Ollendorf, PhD of the USA Institute for Clinical and Economic Review and Tufts Medical Center, who will introduce the topic and review the HTAi-ISPOR joint task force guidance. Next, case studies will be presented by Rob Baltussen, PhD and Wija Oortwijn, PhD from Radboud University Medical Centre in the Netherlands as well as Wanrudee Isaranuwatchai, PhD from Thailand’s Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP) across diverse settings, including the Netherlands, Kazakhstan, Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines focusing on the drivers of the deliberative approach, the benefits observed and challenges faced, and the correlation of the approaches taken with the published principles. Finally, Michael DiStefano, PhD from the University of Colorado, USA will explore differences in deliberative philosophy, structure, and approach across settings, and initiate a discussion about differences that are a natural by-product of local norms, culture, and health-system design, and those that might require further academic investigation. The panel will be augmented by selected representatives of the case study countries, who will provide their own thoughts on what is working well and what might require refinement. Interactive audience polling will be conducted on views of the benefits and challenges of implementing deliberative processes as well as level of interest in empirical research.
