The methodical approaches to health technology assessment in Ukraine according to the european model

O. B. Piniazhko, O. M. Zalis’ka

Abstract


The aim of the study was to analyze and present the methodical approaches of health technology assessment(HTA) in Ukraine based on the European experience of HTA Agencies and the opportunities and prospects of adaptation of international data. The methods of HTA have been analyzed and substantiated on the example of treatment of endometriosis in Ukraine. The analysis of the national and international scientific publications, articles, systematic reviews, guidelines on HTA using PubMed,EMBASE and internet resources has been conducted. The HTA methods with the HTA Core Model have been substantiated and tested; directions for the use of the main methodical approaches to HTA taking into account the peculiarities of the national pharmaceutical and medical care have been suggested. As a result of our systematic analysis of the use of the HTA Core Model® by European HTA Agencies the algorithm of the HTA Core model in Ukraine on the national and regional levels according to the European requirements taking into account all the priorities and key trends has been determined. On the example of endometriosis management the method of the HTA Core Model® has been adapted, the alternative treatment regimens have been assessed and the adaptation stages for the assessment of methods and data have been proposed.


Keywords


Health Technology Assessment (HTA); HTA Core Model®; pharmaceutical providing; pharmacoeconomic analysis; endometriosis

References


Воробьев К. П. Европейская политика оценки технологий здравоохранения / К. П. Воробьев // Український медичний часопис. – 2014. – № 2. – С. 142-150.

Воробьев К. П. Национальные агентства оценки технологий здравоохранения в экономически развитых странах / К. П. Воробьев // Український медичний часопис. – 2013. – № 2. – С. 162-172.

Заліська О. М. Історія, стан і перспективи фармакоекономіки в Україні / О. М. Заліська // Еженедельник Аптека. – 2014. – № 15 (936). – Режим доступу до журн.: http://www.apteka.ua/article/286843.

Косяченко К. Л. Методологія оцінки технологій в охороні здоров’я та фармації: актуальність впровадження у вітчизняну систему управління галуззю / К. Л. Косяченко // Управління, економіка та забезпечення якості в фармації. – 2011. – № 5 (19). – С. 24-28.

Мендрік О. А. Перспективи розширення застосування оцінки технологій охорони здоров’я (Health technology assessment) / О. А. Мендрік, О. Заглада // Україна. Здоров’я нації. – 2010. – № 2. – С. 128-131.

Немченко А. С. Дослідження міжнародного досвіду впровадження оцінки технологій в охороні здоров’я / А. С. Немченко, К. Л. Косяченко // Фармацевтичний журнал. – 2011. – № 5. – С. 50-54.

Піняжко О. Б. Теоретичні основи і напрями використання мультикритеріального аналізу рішень у фармацевтичній галузі України відповідно до європейського вектора реформування / О. Б. Піняжко, О. М. Заліська // Фармацевтичний часопис. – 2015. – № 2 (34). – С. 119-124.

Піняжко О. Б. Аналіз фармацевтичного забезпечення при гінекологічних захворюваннях в Україні та світі / О. Б. Піняжко, О. М. Заліська, Н. Р. Готь, Л. І. Гнатишак // Фармацевтичний часопис. – 2013. – № 4 (29). – С. 109-115.

Briggs A. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation / A. Briggs, K. Claxton, M. Schulpher. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force / D. Husereau, M. Drummond, S. Petrou et al. // CHEERS Task Force.Value Health. – 2013. – № 16 (2). – Р. 231-250.

EUnetHTA Joint Action 2, Work Package 8. HTA Core Model ® version 2.1 (Pdf); 2015. Available from http://www.corehta.info/BrowseModel.aspx.

Guegan E. EUnetHTA: further steps towards European cooperation on health technology assessment / E. Guegan, M. Huić, C. Teljeur // International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. – 2014. – № 30. – Р. 475-477.

Jones G. Development of the Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire: the EHP-5 // G. Jones, C. Jenkinson, S. Kennedy // Qual Life Res. – 2004. – № 13 (3). – P. 695-704.

Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions / M. Drummond, J. Schwartz, B. Jonsson et al. // International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. – 2008. – № 24. – Р. 244-258.

Kolasa K. Role of health technology assessment in the process of implementation of the EU Transparency Directive: relevant experience from Central Eastern European countries / K. Kolasa, Z. Kalo, V. Zah, T. Dolezal // Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. – 2012. – Vol. 12. – P. 283-287.

Kosyachenko K. L. Methodological approaches to development of the national guidelines on the health technology assessment / K. L. Kosyachenko, A. S. Nemchenko // Вісник фармації. – 2014. – № 1. – С. 54-57.

Methods for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a systematic review, comparison, and synthesis of method literature / T. Mathes, M. Walgenbach, S. L. Antoine et al. // Med Decis Making. – 2014. – № 34 (7). – P. 826-840.

Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programme / M. F. Drummond, M. J. Sculpher, G. W. Torrance et al. – Third edition. – Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005.

Mettler L. Impact of medical and surgical treatment of endometriosis on the cure of endometriosis and pain / L. Mettler, R. Ruprai, I. Alkatout // Biomed Res Int. – 2014. – Vol. 2014.

Support in Market Development, SMD – P. [Electronic resourse] Access mode: http://www.smd.net.ua/.

The burden of endometriosis: costs and quality of life of women with endometriosis and treated in referral centres / S. Simoens, G. Dunselman, C. Dirksen et al. // Hum. Reprod. – 2012. – Vol. 27 (5). – Р. 1292-1301.

The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. – P. [Electronic resourse] Access mode: http://handbook.cochrane.org/

The HTA Core Model: A novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments / K. Lampe, M. Makela, M. Velasco Garrido et al. // International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. – 2009. – Vol. 25. – P. 9-20.

Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report / M. Drummond, M. Barbieri, J. Cook et al. // Value Health. – 2009. – Vol. 12. – P. 409-418.

Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Evaluating and Documenting Content Validity for the use of existing instruments and their modification PRO Task Force Report / M. Rothman, L. Burke, P. Erickson et al. // Value in Health. – 2009. – Vol. 12. – P. 1075-83.

Velasco Garrido M. Developing Health Technology Assessment to Address Health Care System Needs / M. Velasco Garrido, A. Gerhardus, J. A. Rоttingen, R. Busse // Health Policy. – 2010. – Vol. 94. – P. 196-202.

World bank. – P. [Electronic resourse] Access mode: http://data.worldbank.org/country/ukraine

Zalis’ka O. The prevalence and cost of illness in women with endometriosis in Ukraine/ O. Zalis’ka, O. Piniazhko, I. Vernikovskyy, L. Gnatyshak // Value in Health. – 2014. – Abstracts 17th ISPOR Annual European Congress 8-12 November, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. – Vol. 17, № 7. – P. 158.


GOST Style Citations


1. Vorobyov KP. The European policy of Health Technology Assessment. Ukrainian medical journal. 2013; 2: 162-172.

2. Vorobyov KP. National agencies for health technology assessment in economically developed countries. Ukrainian medical journal. 2013; 2(94): 162-172.

3. Zalis’ka O. The history, state and perspectives of pharmacoeconomics in Ukraine. The weekly Pharmacy. 2014; 15(936). [online] http://www.apteka.ua/article/286843.

4. Kosyachenko KL. Methodology for evaluation of technology in healthcare and pharmacy: actuality of introduction in domestic industry management. Management, economy and providing of quality in pharmacy. 2011; 5(19): 24-28.

5. Mandrik OA, Zaglada O. Perspectives of the broaden use of Health technology assessment. Ukraine. Health of the nation. 2010; 2: 128-131.

6. Nemchenko AS, Kosyachenko KL. The analysis of the international experience of implementation of HTA. Pharmaceutical journal. 2011; 5: 50-54.

7. Piniazhko OB, Zalis’ka OM. Theoretical foundations and use of multi-criteria decision analysis in the pharmaceutical sector of Ukraine according to the European reforming vector. 2015; 2(34): 119-124.

8. Piniazhko OB, Zalis’ka OM, Hot NR, Hnatyshak LI. Analysis of pharmaceutical providing for gynecological diseases in Ukraine and in the world. Pharmaceutical review. 2013; 4(29): 109-115.

9. Briggs A, Claxton K, Schulpher M. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2006.

10. Husereau D, Drummond M, Petrou S, Carswell C. et all. Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS)-explanation and elaboration: a report of the ISPOR Health Economic Evaluation Publication Guidelines Good Reporting Practices Task Force. CHEERS Task Force. Value in Health. 2013; 16(2): 231-250.

11. EUnetHTA Joint Action 2, Work Package 8. HTA Core Model ® version 2.1 (Pdf); 2015. Available from http://www.corehta.info/BrowseModel.aspx.

12. Guegan E, Huić M, Teljeur C. EUnetHTA: further steps towards European cooperation on health technology assessment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2014; 30: 475-477.

13. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S. Development of the Short Form Endometriosis Health Profile Questionnaire: the EHP-5. Qual Life Res. 2004;13(3): 695-704.

14. Drummond M, Schwartz J, Jonsson B, Luce B et al. Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2008; 24: 244-258.

15. Kolasa K, Kalo Z, Zah V, Dolezal T. Role of health technology assessment in the process of implementation of the EU Transparency Directive: relevant experience from Central Eastern European countries. Expert Rev. Pharmacoecon. Outcomes Res. 2012; 12: 283–287.

16. Kosyachenko KL, Nemchenko AS. Methodological approaches to development of the national guidelines on the health technology assessment. Visnyk of pharmacy. 2014; 1: 54-57.

17. Mathes T, Walgenbach M, Antoine SL, Pieper D et al. Methods for systematic reviews of health economic evaluations: a systematic review, comparison, and synthesis of method literature. Med Decis Making. 2014; 34(7): 826-840.

18. Drummond MF, Sculpher MJ, Torrance GW et al. Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programme. Third edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2005.

19. Mettler L, Ruprai R, Alkatout I. Impact of medical and surgical treatment of endometriosis on the cure of endometriosis and pain. Biomed Res Int. 2014; 2014.

20. Support in Market Development, SMD – P. [online]: http://www.smd.net.ua/.

21. Simoens S, Dunselman G, Dirksen C, Hummelshoj et al. The burden of endometriosis: costs and quality of life of women with endometriosis and treated in referral centres. Hum. Reprod. 2012; 27(5): 1292-1301.

22. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. – P. [online]: http://handbook.cochrane.org/

23. Lampe K, Makela M, Velasco Garrido M et al. The HTA Core Model: A novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. 2009; 25: 9–20.

24. Drummond M, Barbieri M, Cook J, Glick HA, Lis J et al. Transferability of economic evaluations across jurisdictions: ISPOR Good Research Practices Task Force report. Value Health. 2009; 12: 409–418.

25. Rothman M, Burke L, Erickson P, Leidy NK et al. Use of existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments and their modification: the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Evaluating and Documenting Content Validity for the use of existing instruments and their modification PRO Task Force Report. Value in Health. 2009; 12: 1075-83.

26. Velasco Garrido M, Gerhardus A, Røttingen JA, Busse R. Developing Health Technology Assessment to Address Health Care System Needs. Health Policy. 2010; 94: 196–202.

27. World bank. – P. [online]: http://data.worldbank.org/country/ukraine

28. Piniazhko O, Zalis’ka O, Vernikovskyy I. The prevalence and cost of illness in women with endometriosis in Ukraine. Value in Health. 2014; 17(7): 507.





DOI: https://doi.org/10.24959/sphhcj.15.18

Abbreviated key title: Soc. farm. ohor. zdor.

ISSN 2518-1564 (Online), ISSN 2413-6085 (Print)