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.
The adoption and reimbursement of a new or novel medical device frequently occurs after an economic evaluation of the innovation. One important factor for reimbursement rejections by the English National Institute for Health and and Care Excellence (NICE) Medical Technologies Evaluation Programme (MTEP) appears to be the little or no attention to early assessment (1). The aim of this study is to achieve a more in-depth and comprehensive understanding of the value of early Health Technology Assessment (HTA) for new medical devices.
METHODS:
This study employs a mixed methods research strategy. Our informant interviews involved two types of key stakeholders: health economists in academia and professionals in medical devices firms with a professional role in research and development or market access departments. Our qualitative analysis focused on two samples from six universities (five in the United Kingdom, UK, and one in Italy) and six small to medium-sized enterprises (five in the UK, and one in Italy). Insights from field work interviews helped to design our complementary quantitative analysis.
RESULTS:
During thematic analysis, barriers to adoption of early HTA emerged across three domains. First, educational barriers (that is, what HTA/early HTA is and how to conduct it) influenced the foundation for the reimbursement strategy. Second, interviewees highlighted the presence of intrinsic barriers (for example, resources for translational and early preclinical research, reliability and reproducibility, evidence, and dissemination of sensitive information) within existing practices and knowledge. Third, several research gaps (that is, medical device classification, standardization of methods, guidelines for developers, and alignment of stakeholders perspectives) were identified. Finally, academics adopted early HTA to assess different aspects of a medical device early in development; however, developers were focused on the assessment of investment and safety/usability factors, especially for in-house evaluations.
CONCLUSIONS:
If decision makers expect developers to produce better quality evidence and society aims to optimize resources that is, not investing in non-cost-effective technologies, then the incorporation of a more robust analytical framework including a societal perspective is necessary to understand how early HTA can be embedded into all aspects of the development process.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.