We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Several overarching health policy reform processes are currently underway in South Africa (SA), providing an opportunity to establish health technology assessment (HTA) and value-based assessment (VBA) frameworks that foster patient and citizen involvement (PCI). A mapping of the capacity, knowledge, and skill of SA PCI advocacy actors and understanding of the ‘middle-ground’ and influencing relationships that influence advocacy strategies for PCI in HTA, will allow us to determine the needs of PCI actors to entrench PCI principles in the emerging institutionalization of HTA in SA.
Methods
An analysis of national and international legislative and policy frameworks indicates current gaps and opportunities for PCI institutionalization in HTA in SA. A survey was conducted to determine SA patient and citizen advocacy actors’ capacity, knowledge, and skill across multiple disease areas. An analysis of decision maker’s opinions and positions about PCI in HTA and VBA policy, and their potential influence on the PCI process was undertaken.
Results
The legislation and policy review indicate that engagement initiatives are positioned at the ‘involvement’ or ‘consultation’ stages of the engagement continuum, rather than higher-level engagement. Five percent of patient advocacy groups (PAGs) interviewed have formalized PCI HTA advocacy strategies. Few PAGs indicated employing processes to actively monitor the HTA and PCI-related activities of decision-makers.
The majority of PAGs stated that collaborative efforts within larger networks would generate more success, if they engaged in PCI in HTA advocacy. Over eighty percent of civil society stakeholders face capacity constraints, such as lack of knowledge of the legislative framework and theory of HTA, funding and manpower to engage in PCI. The majority of HTA processes undertaken by funders in SA do not actively include PAGs or formalized PCI.
Conclusions
Existing legislative and policy frameworks do not include PCI capacity-building strategies. This is impacted by the lack of coordination amongst patient and consumer groups, the willingness of existing HTA structures to formalize PCI, and the resources of the country’s PCI advocate actors to influence existing HTA processes.
In building health technology assessment (HTA) and related decision processes in Southern Africa, institutions and stakeholders face region-specific challenges such as disease prevalence and population makeup. These can be addressed by collaboratively discussing patient engagement solutions that fit the local culture and systems and serve to ensure equitable and sustainable access to patient-relevant health technologies. Our aim is to initiate a collaboration for driving patient involvement (PI) suitable for the Southern African context and Sub-Saharan patient communities. In addition, we explore current experiences in PI, including the stakeholder expectations, gaps, limitations, and new opportunities.
Methods
A one-day hybrid multi-stakeholder PI in HTA workshop was held in Johannesburg, South Africa. Co-created by the participants, the outputs are a call to action and a concept draft for the vital success criteria for PI in the region. The content of the call to action is gathered from pre-workshop surveys, interviews, and outcomes from historic meetings held in conjunction with the Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) PI workstream as well as facilitated discussion from the actual workshop.
Results
The workshop was attended by 42 participants from nine countries, representing diverse stakeholder groups. The attendees represented multiple PI stakeholder groups. The workshop survey was completed by 44 respondents, while 12 participants completed the post-event survey. A workshop outcomes document highlighting a high level of alignment and identifying seven key success factors was developed. A workshop proceeding detailing the outcomes is now being drafted.
Conclusions
Over 95 percent of respondents to pre-and post-surveys indicated an interest in contributing to a more in-depth description of PI in their country. While the majority of participants were from South Africa, participants from Tanzania, Ethiopia, Zambia, and Zimbabwe emphasized that trans-African-engagement for HTA will provide an additional opportunity for HTA in Africa and patient and community participation in HTA and healthcare decision-making. Hence, a collaborative platform could help all African countries to advance and benefit from improved healthcare decision processes.
In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) striving to achieve universal health coverage, the involvement of different stakeholders in formal or informal ways in health technology assessment (HTA) must be culturally and socially relevant and acceptable. Challenges may be different from those seen in high-income countries. In this article, we aimed to pilot a questionnaire for uncovering the context-related aspects of patient and citizen involvement (PCI) in LMICs, collecting experiences encountered with PCI, and identifying opportunities for patients and citizens toward contributing to local decision- and policy-making processes related to health technologies.
Methods
Through a collaborative, international multi-stakeholder initiative, a questionnaire was developed for describing each LMIC's healthcare system context and the emergence of opportunities for PCI relating to HTA. The questionnaire was piloted in the first set of countries (Brazil, Indonesia, Nigeria, and South Africa).
Results
The questionnaire was successfully applied across four diverse LMICs, which are at different stages of using HTA to inform decision making. Only in Brazil, formal ways of PCI have been defined. In the other countries, there is informal influence that is contingent upon the engagement level of patient and citizen advocacy groups (PCAGs), usually strongest in areas such as HIV/AIDS, TB, oncology, or rare diseases.
Conclusions
The questionnaire can be used to analyze the options for patients and citizens to participate in HTA or healthcare decision making. It will be rolled out to more LMICs to describe the requirements and opportunities for PCI in the context of LMICs and to identify possible routes and methodologies for devising a more systematic and formalized PCI in LMICs.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.