Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T15:01:48.785Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

VISIONS OF STAKEHOLDERS ABOUT INSTUTIONALIZATION OF HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT IN CHILE: A QUALITATIVE STUDY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 June 2017

Constanza Paz Lavín ,
Rafael Alaniz  and
Manuel Espinoza
Constanza Paz Lavín
Affiliation:
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile-Department of Public Health
Rafael Alaniz
Affiliation:
Universidad de Chile-Specialists Program in Public Health
Manuel Espinoza
Affiliation:
Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile-Department of Public Healthmaespinoza@med.puc.cl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore and describe the viewpoints and beliefs with respect to a health technology assessment (HTA) process and its institutionalization in a sample of stakeholder representatives in Chile.

Methods: A qualitative study with a descriptive design, based on the model of discourse analysis, was performed. Eighteen semi-structured interviews were conducted on nineteen Chilean representatives of stakeholders in HTA. The data analysis was based on a process of open coding that allows the contrasting of the interviewees’ visions.

Results: From what the interviewees mentioned, a proposal to institutionalize the process of HTA is presented for Chile. The focus is on three main areas: (i) Principles to guide the HTA, (ii) Institutional Framework for Chile, and (iii) Impacts associated with their implementation process. Transparency and participation were the main principles identified. The idea of an autonomous body for HTA, independent and publicly funded, was widely supported. However, this implementation could face potential resistance from technicians and politicians, who might impose barriers to avoid their loss of decision power.

Conclusions: There is a broad agreement about the importance of creating a national institution for HTA, independent and publicly funded. This study supplies relevant information for other countries that are currently undertaking a similar process.

Keywords

Qualitative researchHealth technology assessmentDecision makingChile
Type
Policies
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Issue 2 , 2017 , pp. 303 - 306
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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. Daniels, N. Accountability for reasonableness: Establishing a fair process for priority setting is easier than agreeing on principles. BMJ. 2000;321:1300-1301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment. INAHTA. [homepage on the Internet]. Alberta, Canada: Institute of Health Economics. http://www.inahta.net/ (accessed March 3, 2015).Google Scholar
3. Banta, D. What is technology assessment?. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:7-9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4. Drummond, MF, Schwartz, JS, Jönsson, B, et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:244-258.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5. Banta, D. The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 2003;63:121-132.Google Scholar
6. Kuhn-Barrientos, L. Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias: marco conceptual y perspectiva global. Rev Med Chil. 2014;142:11-15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Castillo-Riquelme, M, Santelices, E. Fundamentos para la Institucionalización de la Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias en Chile. Rev Med Chil. 2014;142:50-54.Google Scholar
8. Estado, de Chile. Ley N°19.966, Establece un Régimen de Garantías en Salud. Santiago, Chile: Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional (September 3, 2004).Google Scholar
9. Ministerio, de Salud. Revisión del Proceso de Priorización de las Garantias Explicitas en Salud (GES). [Intrernet]. Santiago: Departamento de Economía de la Salud, MINSAL; 2011. http://desal.minsal.cl/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/REVISION_PRIORIZACION_INFORMEFINAL.pdf (accessed March 3, 2015).Google Scholar
10. Comisión Nacional de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias. Propuesta de un modelo de implementación e institucionalización de la Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias en Chile. [Internet]. Santiago, Chile: Ministerio de Salud; 2013. http://web.minsal.cl/sites/default/files/files/InformeFinalPropuestaETESAChile.pdf (accessed March 3, 2015).Google Scholar
11. Jorgensen, M, Phillips L, J. Discourse analysis as theory and method. London: SAGE Publications Ltd; 2002.Google Scholar
12. Polit, DF, Hungler, BP. Investigación científica en ciencias de la salud. México: McGraw-Hill Interamericana Editores, SA; 2000.Google Scholar
13. Mays, N, Pope, C. Rigour and qualitative research. BMJ. 1995;311:109-112.Google Scholar
14. Strauss, A, Corbin, J. Bases de la investigación cualitativa. Técnicas y procedimientos para desarrollar la teoría fundamentada. Medellín: Editorial Universidad de Antioquia; 2002.Google Scholar
15. Flick, U. Introducción a la investigación cualitativa. Madrid: Ediciones Morata, SL; 2012.Google Scholar
16. Instituto de Evaluación Tecnológica en Salud, IETS. Manual Metodológico: Participación y Deliberación. Bogotá DC: IETS; 2014.Google Scholar
17. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health, CADTH. Providing input to CADTH. [Internet]. Ottawa: Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health; 2015. https://www.cadth.ca/provide-input (accessed May 7, 2015).Google Scholar
18. National Institutional for Health and Clinical Excellence, NICE. Social value judgments: Principles for the development of NICE guidelines; 2005. https://www.nice.org.uk/media/default/About/what-we-do/Research-and-development/Social-Value-Judgements-principles-for-the-development-of-NICE-guidance.pdf (accessed May 14, 2015).Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Lavín supplementary material

Table S1

Download Lavín supplementary material(File)
File 28 KB