Objectives: Within French university hospitals, some internal committees are in charge of conducting hospital-based health technology assessment (Hb-HTA) to support managerial decisions regarding the adoption of innovations. For manufacturers, hospitals are usually the entry point for new and innovative medical devices, which cannot be accessed without the Hb-HTA committees' approval. Thus, the main objective of this pilot survey was to explore manufacturers’ insights into Hb-HTA processes.

Methods: A two-step pilot survey was conducted in 2014. First, semi-structured phone interviews were carried out to capture manufacturers' feedback on the Hb-HTA procedure. Second, a prospective and iterative questionnaire designed to explore manufacturers’ market access strategies was administered.

Results: Eight manufacturers from the medical device industry completed the retrospective phone interviews, and five of them participated in the prospective survey. According to the overall feedback, the Hb-HTA process timeline and transparency are major issues, and the expectations of internal committees, especially in terms of clinical evidence, remain difficult to understand. However, despite this and due to the complexity of reimbursement processes at the national level, manufacturers are increasingly considering hospital adoption through Hb-HTA submission as a viable market access and coverage opportunity.

Conclusions: Our study reaffirms the primary role of hospitals in the diffusion of innovative medical devices. However, to ensure efficient and broad access to innovation, cooperation between local and national HTA bodies is critical and should be promoted.

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.

Background: The number of new medical devices for individual use that are launched annually exceeds the assessment capacity of the French national health technology assessment (HTA) agency. This has resulted in hospitals, and particularly university hospitals (UHs), developing hospital-based HTA initiatives to support their decisions for purchasing innovative devices. However, the methodologies used in such hospitals have no common basis. The aim of this study was to assess a mini-HTA model as a potential solution to harmonize HTA methodology in French UHs.

Methods: A systematic review was conducted on Medline, Embase, Health Technology Assessment database, and Google Scholar to identify published articles reporting the use of mini-HTA tools and decision support-like models. A survey was also carried out in eighteen French UHs to identify in-house decision support tools. Finally, topics evaluated in the Danish mini-HTA model and in French UHs were compared using Jaccard similarity coefficients.

Results: Our findings showed differences between topics evaluated in French UHs and those assessed in decision support models from the literature. Only five topics among the thirteen most evaluated in French UHs were similar to those assessed in the Danish mini-HTA model. The organizational and ethical/social impacts were rarely explored among the surveyed models used in French UHs when introducing new medical devices.

Conclusions: Before its widespread and harmonized use in French UHs, the mini-HTA model would first require adaptations to the French context.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to explore definitions of value and the use of budget impact and affordability considerations in health technology assessment (HTA) in the Asia region, particularly in relation to high cost technologies.

Methods: Issues were debated by senior representatives from HTA and payer systems in Asian countries, delegates from industry, and invited experts at the 2016 meeting of the HTAi Asia Policy Forum (HAPF). A premeeting survey was used to gather data on how value is assessed and budget impact calculations are used within current processes, as well as current approaches to managing affordability.

Results: All systems consider health benefit to be the key component of value. There is little consensus around “wider” elements of value that should be included. All systems use budget impact in decision making, although meeting attendees noted the challenges in making accurate estimates. The most common strategies used to address affordability concerns to date have been: restricting coverage, for example, to patients who are likely to get the highest value; discounts; and revenue caps. It was noted that these “solutions” may have unintended consequences of creating inequitable access to therapies and failing to provide adequate rewards for innovation.

Conclusions: Decision makers, HTA agencies, and industry need to continue to work together to find mutually agreeable solutions to ensure that patients continue to get equitable access to effective therapies at costs that can be afforded throughout the Asia region.

Background: In recent years, there has been a surge in the development of frameworks to assess the value of different types of health technologies to inform healthcare resource allocation. The reasons for, and the potential of, these value frameworks were discussed during the 2017 Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Policy Forum Meeting.

Methods: This study reflects the discussion, drawing on presentations from invited experts and Policy Forum members, as well as a background paper.

Results: The reasons given for a proliferation of value frameworks included: rising healthcare costs; more complex health technology; perceived disconnect between price and value in some cases; changes in societal values; the need for inclusion of additional considerations, such as ethical issues; and greater empowerment of clinicians and patients in defining and using value frameworks. Many Policy Forum participants recommended learning from existing frameworks. Furthermore, there was a desire to agree on the core components of value frameworks, defining the additional value elements as necessary and considering how they might be measured and used in practice. Furthermore, adherence to the principles of transparency, predictability, broad stakeholder involvement, and accountability were widely supported, along with being forward looking, explicit, and consistent across decisions.

Conclusions: Value frameworks continue to evolve with significant implications for global incentives for innovation and access to health technologies. There is a role for the HTA community to address some of the key areas discussed during the meeting, such as defining the core components for assessing the value of a health technology.

In the above publication by Chen et al. (2017), the authors neglected to include that Dr. Zhang was supported by the 111 Project (Grant Number B16031) as part of their financial support and conflicts of interest. The complete corrected conflicts of interest section is provided below:

The authors report grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China, grants from the National Science & Technology Pillar Program during the Twelfth Five-year Plan Period, and grants from the Key Discipline in Shanghai during the conduct of the study. Dr. Zhang was supported by the 111 Project (Grant Number B16031).