Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-gtxcr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T09:43:48.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

CONTRIBUTION OF STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT TO THE IMPACT OF A HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: AN IRISH CASE STUDY

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 October 2017

Máirín Ryan ,
Patrick S. Moran ,
Patricia Harrington ,
Linda Murphy ,
Michelle O'Neill ,
Marty Whelan  and
Conor Teljeur
Máirín Ryan
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin Trinity College Dublinmryan@hiqa.ie
Patrick S. Moran
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin Trinity College Dublin
Patricia Harrington
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin
Linda Murphy
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin
Michelle O'Neill
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin
Marty Whelan
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin
Conor Teljeur
Affiliation:
Health Information and Quality Authority, Dublin Trinity College Dublin
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: The aim of this study was to illustrate the contribution of stakeholder engagement to the impact of health technology assessment (HTA) using an Irish HTA of a national public access defibrillation (PAD) program.

Background: In response to draft legislation that proposed a PAD program, the Minister for Health requested that Health Information and Quality Authority undertake an HTA to inform the design and implementation of a national PAD program and the necessary underpinning legislation. The draft legislation outlined a program requiring widespread installation and maintenance of automatic external defibrillators in specified premises.

Methods: Stakeholder engagement to optimize the impact of the HTA included one-to-one interviews with politicians, engagement with an Expert Advisory Group, public and targeted consultation, and positive media management.

Results: The HTA quantified the clinical benefits of the proposed PAD program as modest, identified that substantial costs would fall on small/medium businesses at a time of economic recession, and that none of the programs modeled were cost-effective. The Senator who proposed the Bill actively publicized the HTA process and its findings and encouraged participation in the public consultation. Participation of key stakeholders was important for the quality and acceptability of the HTA findings and advice. Media management promoted public engagement and understanding. The Bill did not progress.

Conclusions: The HTA informed the decision not to progress with legislation for a national PAD program. Engagement was tailored to ensure that key stakeholders including politicians and the public were informed of the HTA process, the findings, and the advice, thereby maximizing acceptance. Appropriate stakeholder engagement optimizes the impact of HTA.

Keywords

HTAImpactStakeholder engagementMediaPoliticians
Type
Theme Submissions
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 33 , Issue 4: Mini-Theme: Stories of HTA Impact , 2017 , pp. 424 - 429
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. EUnetHTA, What is HTA? http://www.eunethta.eu/faq/Category%201-0 (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
2. O'Donnell, JC, Pham, SV, Pashos, CL, Miller, DW, Smith, MD. Health technology assessment: Lessons learned from around the world–An overview. Value Health. 2009;12 (Suppl 2) S1-S5Google Scholar
3. Public Health (Availability of Defibrillators) Bill 2013. 2013. http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2013/4813/b4813s.pdf (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
4. Public Health (Availability of Defibrillators) Bill 2013. Seanad Eireann Debate. 2013. http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2013061900035 (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
5. Health Information and Quality Authority. Guidelines for evaluating the clinical effectiveness of health technologies in Ireland. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/guidelines (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
6. Health Information and Quality Authority. Guidelines for the retrieval and interpretation of economic evaluations of health technologies in Ireland. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/guidelines (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
7. Health Information and Quality Authority. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies in Ireland. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/guidelines (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
8. Health Information and Quality Authority. Guidelines for the budget impact analysis of health technologies in Ireland. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/guidelines (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
9. EUnetHTA Joint Action 2 WP8. HTA Core Model version 2.0. 2013, [Online]. www.corehta.info/BrowseModel.aspx (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
10. Health Information and Quality Authority. Guidelines for stakeholder engagement in health technology assessment in Ireland. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/guidelines (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
11. Health Information and Quality Authority. Health technology assessment of public access defibrillation. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/new-assessments/public-access-defibrillation (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
12. Moran, PS, Teljeur, C, Masterson, O'Neill M, Harrington, P, Ryan, M. Cost-effectiveness of a national public access defibrillation programme. Resuscitation. 2015;91:48–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13. Health Information and Quality Authority. Report on the outcome of the public consultation on the draft Health Technology Assessment of Public Access Defibrillation. Dublin: Health Information and Quality Authority; 2014. https://www.hiqa.ie/healthcare/health-technology-assessment/new-assessments/public-access-defibrillation (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
14. Prelude. Seanad Eireann Debate. 2013. http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2013121200005? (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
15. Prelude. Seanad Eireann Debate. 2014. http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2014100900002? (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
16. Fine Gael. Mitchell O'Connor urges public to contribute to defibrillator debate. Fine Gael; 2014. https://www.finegael.ie/mitchell-oconnor-urges-public-to-contribute-to-defibrillator-debate/ (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
17. Prelude. Seanad Eireann Debate. 2014. http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/debates%20authoring/debateswebpack.nsf/takes/seanad2014120200002? (accessed February 2, 2017).Google Scholar
18. Teljeur, C, Harrington, P, Moran, P, Ryan, M. Impact of HTA - An Irish case study. Value Health. 2015;18:A342.Google Scholar
19. Rosen, M, Werko, S. Does health technology assessment affect policy-making and clinical practice in Sweden? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2014;30:265–372.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20. Zechmeister, I, Schumacher, I. The impact of health technology assessment reports on decision making in Austria. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2012;28:77–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed