Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T23:00:07.493Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

OP165 Health Technology Assessment And Public Health Priority Setting In China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 December 2019

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction

Since 2009, China has initiated a national program on free provision of essential public health services. The national program has expanded both in terms of service categories and funding, showing China's great commitment to universal health coverage. However, with slowdown of public input in the health sector, the government decided to prioritize interventions and optimize reimbursement packages. Researchers in the China National Health Development Research Center (CNHDRC)—the Chinese national health technology assessment (HTA) agency were asked to design the tools to facilitate the decision process.

Methods

With multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) method, the researchers analyzed value dimensions in public health issues, and built an evidence matrix for the priority-setting decisions. Supported by HTA tools, they appraised interventions and services through literature review and field studies, and projected budget impact of potential adjustment decisions based on cost analysis results. A deliberative process of key stakeholder groups was taken, and their views were counted in making the final recommendations.

Results

Based on evidence review and scores of stakeholders’ judgment, two public health service interventions were recommended for removal, and another two for adjustment (one for merger, one for optimizing care pathway). Cost estimation and potential budgetary impact were also analyzed to support financial decisions.

Conclusions

HTA and MCDA are key tools for defining the value criteria, evidence framework, and deliberative process for the essential public health program. However, lack of cost-effectiveness evidence hinders fine-tuned decisions on resource allocation. Continual health economic evaluation needs to be conducted in the near future.

Type
Oral Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019