Evaluation of the impact of patient input in health technology assessments at NICE
| Autor: | Heidi Livingstone, Helen Crosbie, Sheela Upadhyaya, Kevin Harris, Vassilia Verdiel, Lizzie Thomas |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2021 |
| Předmět: |
Technology Assessment
Biomedical media_common.quotation_subject Cost-Benefit Analysis Advisory Committees Nice Qualitative property Context (language use) Technology assessment 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Excellence Surveys and Questionnaires 030212 general & internal medicine Patient participation media_common computer.programming_language Medical education Evidence-Based Medicine 030503 health policy & services Health Policy Health technology United Kingdom Patient input Patient Participation 0305 other medical science Psychology computer |
| Zdroj: | International journal of technology assessment in health care. 37 |
| ISSN: | 1471-6348 0266-4623 |
| Popis: | Objective Accounts of patient experiences are increasingly used in health technology assessment (HTA) processes. However, we know little about their impact on the decision-making process. This study aims to assess the level and the type of impact of patient input to highly specialised technologies (HSTs) and interventional procedures (IPs) guidance at the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Methods A questionnaire was developed to capture quantitative and qualitative data on the amount and type of impact of patient input into NICE HTAs. It was completed by committee members of the guidance-producing programs after a discussion of the considered topics. The data were analyzed by topic and overall, for each program, and compared across programs. Results Patient input was assessed on ten pieces of HST guidance published between January 2015 and November 2019, and on twenty-six pieces of IP guidance scoped between February 2016 and October 2018. A total of 96 responses were collected for HST and 440 for IP. The level of impact of patient input was higher for HST than for IP. For HST, no respondents stated that it had no impact, whereas in IP, 35 percent of respondents did. The most common types of impact found for HST and IP were that it helped interpret the other evidence and that it provided new evidence. Conclusions The impact of patient input is not necessarily explicit in changing recommendations, but it provides context, reassurance, and new information to the committee for the decision-making process in HTAs. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|