Defining the Value of Health Technologies in Latin America: Developments in Value Frameworks to Inform the Allocation of Healthcare Resources

Abstract

ObjectivesThe recent development of value frameworks to inform healthcare resource allocation responds to a demand to make the decision-making process more inclusive and explicit. The objectives of the 2018 Latin American (LAtam) Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Policy Forum were to explore the current international experiences and to discuss the potential application of value frameworks in Latin America.MethodsA background paper, presentations, and group discussions of Policy Forum members (43 participants, 12 LAtam countries represented) at the 2018 HTAi Policy Forum meeting informed this paper.ResultsParticipants agreed that HTA and decision making based on more comprehensive and inclusive value frameworks could improve health system effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and equity; promote transparency in the decision process; sustain a more comprehensive assessment of technologies; and facilitate stakeholder participation as well as accountability of decisions. Criteria that were identified as essential to be included in a value framework for LAtam were burden of illness and severity of the disease, effectiveness and safety of the technology, quality of the evidence, cost-effectiveness, and budget impact. Potential challenges identified for the application of value frameworks in LAtam, included scarcity of human resources and delays in the assessment process.ConclusionsForum participants agreed that the next steps should be to identify appropriate processes and methodologies, adapted to the context of each country, regarding the application of value frameworks to improve the link between HTA and decision making.

A Value Framework for the Assessment of Diagnostic Technologies: A Proposal Based on a Targeted Systematic Review and a Multistakeholder Deliberative Process in Latin America

“…COMPARATIVE-EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH/HTA transparency in the decision-making process and to facilitate the participation of key stakeholders. 42 Regarding the development of VFs aimed for use in a broad spectrum of tests, they were made mostly by HTA agencies and government offices to complement the established process in place regarding drugs. More specific VF, such as those for companion diagnostic tests and genetic tests, were usually shaped by scientific societies, researchers, and technology producers.…”

Clinical outcomes after transcatheter aortic valve replacement in South America: A centre‐level systematic review and meta‐analysis of observational data

“…Unfortunately, no such high‐quality data about real‐world performance of technologies exist in our region, 5 probably due to the structure of the health systems in South American countries. The unique available national registry about TAVR outcomes in the region 27 suffered from the potential flaw of low representativeness, given that it included only volunteer academic centres with high technical support that belonged to national specialty societies, which is a known inclusion bias in the design in registries 28 .…”

“…Besides, the dissemination of complex health technologies in low and middle‐income countries (with financial and healthcare accessibility constraints) should be expected to offer different results from both randomized clinical trials and registries from high‐income countries; so, it can be hypothesized that high‐complexity cardiovascular interventions obtain lower‐than‐desired results in our region. Unfortunately, this hypothesis is hard to ascertain in South America, given that currently there are no systematic or continuous registries directed to reflect the reality of cardiovascular interventions that should be able to reveal their outcomes, as they do in high‐income countries 5 …”

Applying process mining in health technology assessment

“…New, modern technologies have been progressively incorporated in healthcare, resulting in increased medical and hospital products and services. Moreover, the new items incorporated repeatedly incur excessively, and frequently unnecessary, use of these resources, thereby failing to meet the criteria of cost-effectiveness and budget impact prescribed by Health Technology Assessment studies [ 1 , 2 ].…”