Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:06:29.693Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Linking evidence from health technology assessments to policy and decision making: The Alberta Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2007

Henry Z. Borowski ,
Jon Brehaut  and
David Hailey
Henry Z. Borowski
Affiliation:
Alberta Health and Wellness
Jon Brehaut
Affiliation:
Hummingbird Consultants
David Hailey
Affiliation:
University of Calgary and Institute of Health Economics
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this study was to develop and implement a decision-making process for public funding of health services that links policy areas with health technology assessment and input from interested parties.

Methods: Health authorities, assessment organizations, and healthcare professionals were consulted as a follow-up to recommendations of an expert panel established by the Alberta government. The methods involved formulation of an eight-stage, collaborative process that incorporates identification through the health ministry of health technologies requiring review, assessment of the technologies using expert groups in Alberta, and consultation and formulation of advice within the ministry to inform ministerial funding decisions.

Results: All components of the decision process have been put in place and have collaborated to provide advice to inform policy on provincial health services. Of nineteen technologies selected for review, five have been completed and decisions made: laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding, fetal fibronectin assay for premature labor, newborn screening for cystic fibrosis, newborn screening for inborn errors of metabolism, and gastric electrical stimulation. A further six reviews are in progress, and reviews of the remaining technologies are planned for 2007.

Conclusions: Bridging the evidence-to-policy gap is more likely to succeed when the policy community is actively engaged and an explicit model is used to put health technology assessment into practice.

Keywords

Health policyHealthcare fundingHealth technology assessmentDecision makingOrganizational
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 155 - 161
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Alberta Health & Wellness. New programs promote better health for children and youth. Edmonton: September 28, 2006 news release.Google Scholar
2.Brehaut, J, Juzwishin, D.Bridging the gap: The use of research evidence in policy development. Edmonton: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research, September 2005. Available at: http://www.ihe.ca/hta/publications.html?Category=HTA%20Initiatives.Google Scholar
3.Expert Advisory Panel to Review Publicly Funded Health Services. The burden of proof: An Alberta model for assessing publicly funded health services. Edmonton: Alberta Health and Wellness, March 2003. Available at: http://www.health.gov.ab.ca/key/EAPprocess.pdf.Google Scholar
4.Government of Alberta. Getting on with better health care: Health policy framework, Edmonton: Alberta Health & Wellness, August 2006. Available at: http://www.health.gov.ab.ca/healthrenewal/GettingBetterHealthcare.pdf.Google Scholar
5.Government of Alberta. Health and wellness business plan 2006-09, Edmonton: March 2006 Available at: http://www.finance.gov.ab.ca/publications/budget/budget2006/health.html.Google Scholar
6.Health Economics Unit. Overview to provincial government health expenditures: Alberta and Canadian Average: 1974/1975 to 2005/2006. Edmonton: Alberta Health & Wellness; May 2006.Google Scholar
7.Health Technology Assessment Task Group. Health technology strategy 1.0. Ottawa: Health Canada, June 2004. Available at: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hcs-sss/pubs/ehealth-esante/2004-tech-strateg/index_e.html.Google Scholar
8.Hummingbird, Consultants. Alberta health technologies decision process report on consultations. Edmonton: Alberta Health & Wellness; 2004.Google Scholar
9.Lomas, J, Culyer, T, McCutcheon, C, McAuley, L, Law, S.Conceptualizing and combining evidence for health system guidance. Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; May 2005.Google Scholar
10.McCutheon, C.What is evidence? Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. April 2006. Available at: http://www.cadth.ca/media/symposium_pdfs/cadth_symposium06_ ppt_McCutcheon.pdf.Google Scholar