Achieving optimal technology use: A proposed model for health technology reassessment.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare providers, managers and policy-makers in many jurisdictions are focused on a common goal: optimizing value and quality of care provided to their citizens within a resource envelope. Health technology reassessment is a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical and economic effects of a technology currently used in the healthcare system to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison with its alternatives. There are, however, few practical experiences with health technology reassessment and, as such, a nascent theoretical and methodological base. Health technology reassessment is a key strategy to achieve optimal healthcare resource utilization, and establishing a model for health technology reassessment is a required methodological step. METHODS AND RESULTS: The purpose of this article is to answer three formative questions: (1) What is health technology reassessment? (2) When should a health technology reassessment be implemented? (3) What is the role of health technology reassessment in evidence-informed health policy? Finally, we propose a conceptual framework for health technology reassessment, which others can modify, adapt, or adopt in their own context. The model consists of three broad phases and six iterative stages: (1) identification, (2) prioritization, (3) evidence synthesis, (4) determine policy/practice recommendation, (5) policy/practice implementation and (6) monitoring and evaluation. Two foundational components (meaningful stakeholder engagement and ongoing knowledge exchange and utilization) are represented across all stages. CONCLUSION: This description of health technology reassessment and the proposed model can be used by healthcare policy-makers and researchers to advance the field of technology management, with the goal of achieving optimal use throughout a technology's lifecycle.

Cost-effectiveness of screening for hepatitis C virus: a systematic review of economic evaluations.

OBJECTIVES: With the developments of near-cures for hepatitis C virus (HCV), who to screen has become a high-priority policy issue in many western countries. Cost-effectiveness of screening programmes should be one consideration when developing policy. The objective of this work is to synthesise the cost-effectiveness of HCV screening programmes. SETTING: A systematic review was completed. 5 databases were searched until May 2016 (NHSEED, MEDLINE, the HTA Health Technology Assessment Database, EMBASE, EconLit). PARTICIPANTS: Any study reporting an economic evaluation (any type) of screening compared with opportunistic or no screening for HCV was included. Exclusion criteria were: (1) abstracts or commentaries, (2) economic evaluations of other interventions for HCV, including blood donors screening, diagnosis tests for HCV, screening for concurrent disease or medications for treatment. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Data extraction included type of model, target population, perspective, comparators, time horizon, discount rate, clinical inputs, cost inputs and outcome. Quality was evaluated using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklist. Data are summarised using narrative synthesis by population. RESULTS: 2305 abstracts were identified with 52 undergoing full-text review. 30 papers met inclusion criteria addressing 7 populations: drug users (n=6), high risk (n=5), pregnant (n=4), prison (n=3), birth cohort (n=8), general population (n=5) and other (n=6). The majority (77%) of the studies were high quality. Drug users, birth cohort and high-risk populations were associated with cost-effectiveness ratios of under £30 000 per quality-adjusted-life-year (QALY). The remaining populations were associated with cost-effectiveness ratios that exceeded £30 000 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Economic evidence for screening populations is robust. If a cost per QALY of £30 000 is considered reasonable value for money, then screening birth cohorts, drug users and high-risk populations are policy options that should be considered.

Characteristics of frequent users of the emergency department in the general adult population: A systematic review of international healthcare systems.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to synthesize and compare population characteristics associated with frequent emergency department (ED) use within and across healthcare systems. METHODS: A systematic review of literature published between 1950 and 2015 was conducted. Healthcare systems of included studies were categorized using the Rothgang-Wendt typology. Demographic, clinical and health service utilization characteristics of frequent ED users in the general adult population were identified within each healthcare system. Pooled estimates, stratified by healthcare system, were calculated to compare the association of each characteristic with frequent, compared to non-frequent, emergency room use. RESULTS: Twenty moderate to high quality comparative cohort studies were included. Among these, five healthcare systems were identified: National Health Insurance; Private Healthcare; National Health Service; Social Health Insurance and Etatist Social Health Insurance. Many similar characteristics were observed: in most healthcare systems, frequent ED users were more likely to be older, female, and have a mental health diagnosis. Previous hospitalizations and high primary care use (>3 visits/year) were associated with future frequent ED use in the NHIS and NHS systems. CONCLUSIONS: Observed similarities suggest that frequent ED use may not differ from one healthcare system to the next. With increasing need to develop solutions for high ED utilization world-wide, targeted efforts must be made to bolster dissemination and uptake of effective interventions across healthcare contexts.

Measuring Resource Utilization: A Systematic Review of Validated Self-Reported Questionnaires.

A variety of methods may be used to obtain costing data. Although administrative data are most commonly used, the data available in these datasets are often limited. An alternative method of obtaining costing is through self-reported questionnaires. Currently, there are no systematic reviews that summarize self-reported resource utilization instruments from the published literature.The aim of the study was to identify validated self-report healthcare resource use instruments and to map their attributes.A systematic review was conducted. The search identified articles using terms like "healthcare utilization" and "questionnaire." All abstracts and full texts were considered in duplicate. For inclusion, studies had to assess the validity of a self-reported resource use questionnaire, to report original data, include adult populations, and the questionnaire had to be publically available. Data such as type of resource utilization assessed by each questionnaire, and validation findings were extracted from each study.In all, 2343 unique citations were retrieved; 2297 were excluded during abstract review. Forty-six studies were reviewed in full text, and 15 studies were included in this systematic review. Six assessed resource utilization of patients with chronic conditions; 5 assessed mental health service utilization; 3 assessed resource utilization by a general population; and 1 assessed utilization in older populations. The most frequently measured resources included visits to general practitioners and inpatient stays; nonmedical resources were least frequently measured. Self-reported questionnaires on resource utilization had good agreement with administrative data, although, visits to general practitioners, outpatient days, and nurse visits had poorer agreement.Self-reported questionnaires are a valid method of collecting data on healthcare resource utilization.

Optimizing Value From Cardiac Rehabilitation: A Cost-Utility Analysis Comparing Age, Sex, and Clinical Subgroups.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost utility of a center-based outpatient cardiac rehabilitation program compared with no program within patient subgroups on the basis of age, sex, and clinical presentation (acute coronary syndrome [ACS] or non-ACS). METHODS: We performed a cost-utility analysis from a health system payer perspective to compare cardiac rehabilitation with no cardiac rehabilitation for patients who had a cardiac catheterization. The Markov model was stratified by clinical presentation, age, and sex. Clinical, quality-of-life, and cost data were provided by the Alberta Provincial Project for Outcome Assessment in Coronary Heart Disease and TotalCardiology. RESULTS: The incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for cardiac rehabilitation varies by subgroup, from $18,101 per QALY gained to $104,518 per QALY gained. There is uncertainty in the estimates due to uncertainty in the clinical effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation. Overall, the probabilistic sensitivity analysis found that 75% of the time participation in cardiac rehabilitation is more expensive but more effective than not participating in cardiac rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of cardiac rehabilitation varies depending on patient characteristics. The current analysis indicates that cardiac rehabilitation is most cost effective for those with an ACS and those who are at higher risk for subsequent cardiac events. The findings of the current study provide insight into who may benefit most from cardiac rehabilitation, with important implications for patient referral patterns.

Reducing frequent visits to the emergency department: a systematic review of interventions.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to establish the effectiveness of interventions to reduce frequent emergency department (ED) use among a general adult high ED-use population. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature from 1950-January 2015. Studies were included if they: had a control group (controlled trials or comparative cohort studies), were set in an ED or acute care facility, and examined the impact of an intervention to reduce frequent ED use in a general adult population. Studies reporting non-original data or focused on a specific patient population were excluded. Study design, patient population, intervention, the frequency of ED visits, and costs of frequent ED use and/or interventions were extracted and narratively synthesized. RESULTS: Among 17 included articles, three intervention categories were identified: case management (n = 12), individualized care plans (n = 3), and information sharing (n = 2). Ten studies examining case management reported reductions in mean (-0.66 to -37) or median (-0.1 to -20) number of ED visits after 12-months; one study reported an increase in mean ED visits (+2.79); and one reported no change. Of these, 6 studies also reported reduced hospital costs. Only 1 study evaluating individualized care plans examined ED utilization and found no change in median ED visits post-intervention. Costs following individualized care plans were also only evaluated in 1 study, which reported savings in hospital costs of $742/patient. Evidence was mixed regarding information sharing: 1 study reported no change in mean ED visits and did not examine costs; whereas the other reported a decrease in mean ED visits (-16.9) and ED cost savings of $15,513/patient. CONCLUSIONS: The impact of all three frequent-user interventions was modest. Case management had the most rigorous evidence base, yielded moderate cost savings, but with variable reductions in ED use. Future studies evaluating non-traditional interventions, tailoring to patient subgroups or socio-cultural contexts, are warranted.

Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Adult and Youth Populations: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Between 30% and 60% of individuals with major depressive disorder will have treatment-resistant depression (TRD): depression that does not subside with pharmaceutical treatment. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is an emerging treatment for TRD. OBJECTIVE: To establish the efficacy and optimal protocol for rTMS among adults and youth with TRD. DATA SOURCES: Two systematic reviews were conducted: one to determine the efficacy of rTMS for adults with TRD and another to determine the effectiveness of rTMS for youth with TRD. For adults, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Health Technology Assessment Database were searched from inception until January 10, 2014 with no language restrictions. Terms aimed at capturing the target diagnosis, such as depression and depressive disorder, were combined with terms describing the technology, such as transcranial magnetic stimulation and rTMS. Results were limited to studies involving human participants and designed as a randomized controlled trial. For youth, the search was altered to include youth only (aged 13-25 years) and all study designs. When possible, meta-analysis of response and remission rates was conducted. STUDY SELECTION: Seventy-three articles were included in this review: 70 on adult and 3 on youth populations. RESULTS: Meta-analysis comparing rTMS and sham in adults found statistically significant results favoring rTMS for response (RR: 2.35 [95% CI, 1.70-3.25]) and remission (RR: 2.24 [95% CI, 1.53-3.27]). No statistically significant differences were found when comparing high- and low-frequency, unilateral and bilateral, low- and high-intensity rTMS or rTMS and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). While meta-analysis of results from the youth literature was not possible, the limited evidence base suggests that rTMS may be effective for treating TRD in youth. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence available on the use of rTMS for adults with TRD indicates that rTMS is approximately twice as effective as a sham procedure, although the optimal rTMS protocol remains unclear. Evidence also indicates that rTMS is as effective as ECT and appears promising as a treatment for youth with TRD; however, the evidence base is underdeveloped.

Effective use of the built environment to manage behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effectiveness of built environment interventions in managing behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) among residents in long-term care settings. METHODS: Systematic review of literature published from 1995-2013. Studies were included if they: were randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental trials, or comparative cohort studies; were in long-term or specialized dementia care; included residents with dementia and BPSD; and examined effectiveness of a built environment intervention on frequency and/or severity of BPSD. Quality of included studies was assessed using the Downs and Black Checklist. Study design, patient population, intervention, and outcomes were extracted and narratively synthesized. RESULTS: Five low to moderate quality studies were included. Three categories of interventions were identified: change/redesign of existing physical space, addition of physical objects to environment, and type of living environment. One of the two studies that examined change/redesign of physical spaces reported improvements in BPSD. The addition of physical objects to an existing environment (n = 1) resulted in no difference in BPSD between treatment and control groups. The two studies that examined relocation to a novel living environment reported decreased or no difference in the severity and/or frequency of BPSD post-intervention. No studies reported worsening of BPSD following a built environment intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The range of built environment interventions is broad, as is the complex and multi-dimensional nature of BPSD. There is inconclusive evidence to suggest a built environment intervention which is clinically superior in long-term care settings. Further high-quality methodological and experimental studies are required to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of such interventions.

Radiofrequency ablation for chronic low back pain: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency ablation (RFA), a procedure using heat to interrupt pain signals in spinal nerves, is an emerging treatment option for chronic low back pain. Its clinical efficacy has not yet been established. OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy of RFA for chronic low back pain associated with lumbar facet joints, sacroiliac joints, discogenic low back pain and the coccyx. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted. Medline, EMBASE, PubMed, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library were searched up to August 2013. Abstracts and full-text articles were reviewed in duplicate. Included articles were sham-controlled randomized controlled trials (RCTs), assessed the efficacy of RFA, reported at least one month of follow-up and included participants who had experienced back pain for at least three months. Data were extracted in duplicate and quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Due to heterogeneity, as well as a lack of reported mean differences and SDs, meta-analysis was not possible using these data. RESULTS: The present systematic review retrieved 1063 abstracts. Eleven sham-controlled RCTs were included: three studies involving discogenic back pain; six studies involving lumbar facet joint pain; and two studies involving sacroiliac joint pain. No studies were identified assessing the coccyx. The evidence supports RFA as an efficacious treatment for lumbar facet joint and sacroiliac joint pain, with five of six and both of the RCTs demonstrating statistically significant pain reductions, respectively. The evidence supporting RFA for the treatment of discogenic pain is mixed. CONCLUSIONS: While the majority of the studies focusing on lumbar facet joints and sacroiliac joints suggest that RFA significantly reduces pain in short-term follow-up, the evidence base for discogenic low back pain is mixed. There is no RCT evidence for RFA for the coccyx. Future studies should examine the clinical significance of the achieved pain reduction and the long-term efficacy of RFA.

Experiences and attitudes toward risk of recurrence testing in women with breast cancer: a systematic review.

Recurrence tests, such as Adjuvant! Online and Oncotype DX, can be used to determine an individual's risk of developing recurrent cancer. These technologies are useful for helping health care practitioners make treatment recommendations. With increasing use, it is necessary to consider patients' experience with and attitudes toward risk of recurrence testing. Factors such as anxiety, influence on decision making, confidence in results, and satisfaction with testing are important to consider. To understand experiences and attitudes toward risk of recurrence testing, from the perspective of women who have used these technologies following a breast cancer diagnosis. A systematic review was completed. Eight multidisciplinary electronic databases, including MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and ERIC, were searched from 1950 to December 17, 2012. Abstracts and full-text papers were screened for inclusion, in duplicate, based on established criteria. Recurrent themes and key concepts were identified and analyzed. One-thousand and twenty-two abstracts were retrieved, and fifty-one proceeded to full-text review. Ten studies reporting on eight populations were included in this review. Key themes that emerged from the literature include: experience with the testing process; influence testing has on treatment; and comprehension of results. The literature suggests that testing for breast cancer recurrence can have a negative impact on women; poor comprehension of test results, and anxiety/distress were the most frequently cited reasons for a negative experience. Despite these drawbacks, women consistently reported that they would recommend testing to others. The literature on this topic is limited, and heterogeneous. The available literature suggests that women are generally satisfied with risk of recurrence testing for breast cancer. Potential drawbacks of risk of recurrence testing include anxiety and comprehension of test results. Additional high-quality research on women's experiences with risk of recurrence testing for breast cancer would improve the evidence base, and would allow stronger conclusions to be drawn.

Health technology reassessment: the art of the possible.

BACKGROUND: Health technology reassessment (HTR) is "a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical, and economic effects of a technology currently used in the healthcare system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives." The purpose of this study is to describe the key themes in the context of current HTR activities and propose a way forward for this newly emerging field. METHODS: Data were gathered from a workshop held as part of the 2012 Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technology in Health (CADTH) symposium. The workshop consisted of two panel presentations followed by discussion; data gathered, including presentations and rich audience discussion transcripts, were analyzed for key themes emerging in the field of HTR using constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: The language chosen to describe HTR will set the tone for engagement. The identification of champions at multiple levels and political will are essential. Key lessons from international experience are: disinvestment is difficult, focus on clinical areas not specific technologies, identify clear goals of the HTR agenda. Six key themes were identified to move the HTR agenda forward: emphasize integration over segregation, focus on development of HTR methods and processes, processes are context-specific but lessons must be shared, build capacity in synergistic interdisciplinary fields, develop meaningful stakeholder engagement, strengthen postimplementation monitoring and evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: To move this field forward, we must continue to build on international experiences with a focus on developing novel methodological approaches to generating, incorporating, and implementing evidence into policy and practice.

A health technology assessment of transient elastography in adult liver disease.

BACKGROUND: An estimated one in 10 Canadians have some form of liver disease. The reference standard for staging and monitoring liver fibrosis is percutaneous liver biopsy--an invasive procedure associated with risks and complications. Transient elastography (TE) represents a noninvasive, ultrasound-based alternative. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of TE compared with liver biopsy for fibrosis staging in adults with five common types of liver disease: hepatitis B, hepatitis C, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cholestatic liver disease and complications post-liver transplantation. METHODS: A systematic review of published and grey literature from 2001 to June 2011 was conducted. Included were observational studies evaluating the accuracy of TE using liver biopsy as the comparator. An economic model was developed to estimate the cost per correct diagnosis gained with liver biopsy compared with TE. Identification of moderate fibrosis (stages 2 to 4) and cirrhosis (stage 4) were considered. RESULTS: Fifty-seven studies were included in the review. The diagnostic accuracy of TE for the five clinical subgroups had sensitivities ranging from 0.67 to 0.92 and specificities ranging from 0.72 to 0.95. Liver biopsy was associated with an additional $1,427 to $7,030 per correct diagnosis gained compared with TE. The model was sensitive to the sensitivity and specificity of TE and the prevalence of fibrosis. CONCLUSIONS: TE is an accurate diagnostic method in patients with moderate fibrosis or cirrhosis. TE is less effective but less expensive than liver biopsy. Systemic implementation of TE should be considered for the noninvasive assessment of liver fibrosis.

Current status of health technology reassessment of non-drug technologies: survey and key informant interviews.

BACKGROUND: Health Technology Reassessment (HTR) is a structured, evidence-based assessment of the clinical, social, ethical and economic effects of a technology currently used in the health care system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives. Little is known about current international HTR practices. The objective of this research was to summarize experience-based information gathered from international experts on the development, initiation and implementation of a HTR program. METHODS: A mixed methods approach, using a survey and in-depth interviews, was adopted. The survey covered 8 concepts: prioritization/identification of potentially obsolete technologies; program development; implementation; mitigation; program championing; stakeholder engagement; monitoring; and reinvestment. Members of Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) and the International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA) formed the sampling frame. Participation was solicited via email and the survey was administered online using SurveyMonkey. Survey results were analyzed using descriptive statistics. To gather more in-depth knowledge, semi-structured interviews were conducted among organizations with active HTR programs. Interview questions were developed using the same 8 concepts. The hour-long interviews were recorded, transcribed and analyzed using constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: Ninety-five individuals responded to the survey: 49 were not discussing HTR, 21 were beginning to discuss HTR, nine were imminently developing a program, and 16 participants had programs and were completing reassessments. The survey results revealed that methods vary widely and that although HTR is a powerful tool, it is currently not being used to its full potential. Of the 16 with active programs, nine agreed to participate in follow-up interviews. Interview participants identified early and extensive stakeholder engagement as the most important factors for success. A lack of top-down support and financial and human resources are inhibiting program development. DISCUSSION: HTR is in its infancy. Although HTRs are being conducted, there are no standardized approaches. However, much can be learned from current international work. Future work should focus on developing a comprehensive methodology, reporting the processes of reassessments and sharing successes and challenges in a common platform.

Health technology reassessment of non-drug technologies: current practices.

OBJECTIVES: Obsolescence is a natural phase of the lifecycle of health technologies. Given increasing cost of health expenditures worldwide, health organizations have little choice but to engage in health technology reassessment (HTR); a structured, evidence-based assessment of the medical, social, ethical, and economic effects of a technology, currently used within the healthcare system, to inform optimal use of that technology in comparison to its alternatives. This research was completed to identify and summarize international HTR initiatives for non-drug technologies. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the terms disinvestment, obsolescence, obsolete technology, ineffective, reassessment, reinvestment, reallocation, program budgeting, and marginal analysis to search PubMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CINAHL until November 2011. Websites of organizations listed as members of INAHTA and HTAi were hand-searched for gray literature. Documents were excluded if they were unavailable in English, if the title/abstract was irrelevant to HTR, and/or if the document made no mention of current practices. All citations were screened in duplicate with disagreements resolved by consensus. RESULTS: Sixty full-text documents were reviewed and forty were included. One model for reassessment was identified; however, it has never been put into practice. Eight countries have some evidence of past or current work related to reassessment; seven have shown evidence of continued work in HTR. There is negligible focus on monitoring and implementation. CONCLUSIONS: HTR is in its infancy. Although health technology reassessments are being conducted, there is no standardized approach. Future work should focus on developing and piloting a comprehensive methodology for completing HTR.