4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Historical development of the htasialink network and its key determinants of success

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The aim of this study was to describe the historical development of the HTAsiaLink network, draw lessons for other similar initiatives globally, and to analyze key determinants of its success and challenges for its future development.

          Methods

          This study is based on the collective and direct experiences of the founding members of the HTAsiaLink Network. Data were collected from presentations they made at various international forums and additional information was reviewed. Data analysis was done using the framework developed by San Martin-Rodriguez et al.

          Results and Conclusions

          HTAsiaLink is a network of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in Asia established in 2011 with the aim of strengthening individual and institutional HTA capacity, reducing duplication and optimizing resources, transfer and sharing of HTA-related lessons among members, and beyond. During its 6 years, the network has expanded, initiating several capacity building activities and joint-research projects, raising awareness of the importance of HTA within the region and beyond, and gaining global recognition while establishing relationships with other global networks. The study identifies the determinants of success of the collaboration. The systemic factors include the favorable outlook toward HTA as an approach for healthcare priority setting in countries with UHC mandates. On organizational factors, the number of newly established HTA agencies in the region with similar needs for capacity building and peer-to-peer support was catalytic for the network development. The interactional aspects include ownership, trust, and team spirit among network members. The network, however, faces challenges notably, financial sustainability and management of the expanded network.

          Related collections

          Most cited references21

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The determinants of successful collaboration: a review of theoretical and empirical studies.

          Successful collaboration in health care teams can be attributed to numerous elements, including processes at work in interpersonal relationships within the team (the interactional determinants), conditions within the organization (the organizational determinants), and the organization's environment (the systemic determinants). Through a review of the literature, this article presents a tabulated compilation of each of these determinant types as identified by empirical research and identifies the main characteristics of these determinants according to the conceptual work. We then present a "showcase" of recent Canadian policy initiatives--The Canadian Health Transition Fund (HTF)--to illustrate how the various categories of determinants can be mobilized. The literature review reveals that very little of the empirical work has dealt with determinants of interprofessional collaboration in health, particularly its organizational and systemic determinants. Furthermore, our overview of experience at the Canadian HTF suggests that a systemic approach should be adopted in evaluative research on the determinants of effective collaborative practice.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            WTP for a QALY and health states: More money for severer health states?

            Background In economic evaluation, cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) is generally used as an indicator for cost-effectiveness. Although JPY 5 million to 6 million (USD 60, 000 to 75,000) per QALY is frequently referred to as a threshold in Japan, do all QALYs have the same monetary value? Methods To examine the relationship between severity of health status and monetary value of a QALY, we obtained willingness to pay (WTP) values for one additional QALY in eight patterns of health states. We randomly sampled approximately 2,400 respondents from an online panel. To avoid misunderstanding, we randomly allocated respondents to one of 16 questionnaires, with 250 responses expected for each pattern. After respondents were asked whether they wanted to purchase the treatment, double-bounded dichotomous choice method was used to obtain WTP values. Results The results clearly show that the WTP per QALY is higher for worse health states than for better health states. The slope was about JPY −1 million per 0.1 utility score increase. The mean and median WTP values per QALY for 16 health states were JPY 5 million, consistent with our previous survey. For respondents who wanted to purchase the treatment, WTP values were significantly correlated with household income. Conclusion This survey shows that QALY based on the EQ-5D does not necessarily have the same monetary value. The WTP per QALY should range from JPY 2 million (USD 20,000) to JPY 8 million (USD 80,000), corresponding to the severity of health states.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              European network for health technology assessment, EUnetHTA: planning, development, and implementation of a sustainable European network for health technology assessment.

              The European network on Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) aimed to produce tangible and practical results to be used in the various phases of health technology assessment and to establish a framework and processes to support this. This article presents the background, objectives, and organization of EUnetHTA, which involved a total of sixty-four partner organizations. Establishing an effective and sustainable structure for a transnational network involved many managerial, policy, and methodological tools, according to the objective of each task or Work Package. Transparency in organization, financial transactions, and decision making was a key principle in the management of the Project as was the commitment to appropriately involve stakeholders. EUnetHTA activities resulted in a clear management and governance structure, efficient partnership, and transnational cooperation. The Project developed a model for sustainable continuation of the EUnetHTA Collaboration. The EUnetHTA Project achieved its goals by producing a suite of practical tools, a strong network, and plans for continuing the work in a sustainable EUnetHTA Collaboration that facilitates and promotes the use of HTA at national and regional levels. Responsiveness to political developments in Europe should be balanced with maintaining a high level of ambition to promote independent, evidence-based information and well-tested tools for best practice based on a strong network of HTA institutions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Int J Sci Res (Raipur)
                Int J Sci Res (Raipur)
                IJTAHC
                International Journal of Science and Research (Raipur, India)
                Cambridge University Press
                2319-7064
                18 June 2018
                2018
                : 34
                : 3
                : 260-266
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Thailand Saw Swee Hock School of Public Health, National University of Singapore
                [2 ]Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP)
                [3 ]National Hepatitis C Program Office, Ministry of Health and Welfare, Taiwan
                [4 ]Ewha Womans University, South Korea
                [5 ]Discipline of Social & Administrative Pharmacy, Universiti Sains Malaysia
                [6 ]Department of Epidemiology and Infectious Diseases, School of Public Health, Imperial College London & Center for Global Development, USA
                [7 ]Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP)
                Author notes

                The authors thank the editor and anonymous reviewers of the journal whose comments significantly improved this article. This work is partly supported financially by the International Decision Support Initiative (iDSI) and the Thailand Research Fund (TRF) under a grant for Senior Research Scholar (RTA5980011). Institute of Global Health Innovation and the Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP) are part of iDSI, a network of priority setting institutions that provides technical assistance on health intervention and technology assessment to governments in low- and middle-income countries. iDSI is funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation; the UK’s Department for International Development and the Rockefeller Foundation. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding agencies.

                Article
                IJTAHC-34-03-260
                10.1017/S0266462318000223
                7722345
                29911515
                9178cf1e-3bc5-41c5-8af2-3f3bd8552f8f
                © Cambridge University Press 2018

                This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence , which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Policy

                health technology assessment,asia,organization and administration,inter-sectoral collaboration,achievement

                Comments

                Comment on this article