Objectives: Our objective was to gather perspectives from payers on how comparative effectiveness research (CER) in the United States and relative effectiveness (RE) research in Europe will impact evidentiary standards for access decisions of new drugs by 2020.

Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with fourteen senior officials representing public and private payers, health technology assessment groups, and pricing and reimbursement bodies in the United States and Europe. An online survey assessed current use of CER/RE evidence and potential trends that might influence its use for decision making by 2020. A semi-structured interview elicited payers' definitions of CER/RE and was structured around four hypothetical cases resembling drugs expected to be more common or poised to create policy challenges by 2020. Topics included acceptance of study designs and analytic methods associated with CER/RE. A systematic content review was done to extract relevant information.

Results: According to key informants, randomization will remain an essential component for assessing comparative or relative effectiveness. They anticipate greater use of policy levers such as conditional reimbursement or prior authorization to manage diffusion of new drugs. Case studies provided important insights into situations when certain types of CER evidence may be acceptable (e.g., observational data when differences between drugs are largely convenience).

Conclusions: Industry perceptions that CER/RE will change payers' evidentiary requirements in the future are consistent with our findings. Growing investment in payers' own data and increased reliance on policy tools to control diffusion of new drugs may also influence the type of evidence industry will be required to produce by 2020.

Background: The intelligent bed is a medical bed with several home healthcare functions. It includes, among others, an “out of bed” detector, a moisture detector, and a catheter bag detector. The design purpose of the intelligent bed is to assist patients in their daily living, facilitate the work of clinical staff, and improves the quality of care. The aim of this sub-study of the iCare project was to explore how health professionals (HPs) experience and use the intelligent bed in patients’ homes.

Methods: The overall research design is inspired by case study methodology. A triangulation of data collection techniques has been used: log book, documentation study, participant observations (n = 45 hr), and qualitative interviews (n = 23). The data have been analyzed by means of Nvivo 9.0.

Findings: We identified several themes: HP transformation from passive technology recipient to innovator; individualized care; work flow redesign; and sensor technology intruding on patient privacy.

Conclusions: It is suggested that functions of the intelligent bed can result in more individualized care, workflow redesign, and time savings for the health professionals in caring for elderly patients. However, the technology intruded on patients’ privacy.

Objectives: Health technology assessment (HTA) carried out for policy decision making has well-established principles unlike hospital-based HTA (HB-HTA), which differs from the former in the context characteristics and ways of operation. This study proposes principles for good practices in HB-HTA units.

Methods: A framework for good practice criteria was built inspired by the EFQM excellence business model and information from six literature reviews, 107 face-to-face interviews, forty case studies, large-scale survey, focus group, Delphi survey, as well as local and international validation. In total, 385 people from twenty countries have participated in defining the principles for good practices in HB-HTA units.

Results: Fifteen guiding principles for good practices in HB-HTA units are grouped in four dimensions. Dimension 1 deals with principles of the assessment process aimed at providing contextualized information for hospital decision makers. Dimension 2 describes leadership, strategy and partnerships of HB-HTA units which govern and facilitate the assessment process. Dimension 3 focuses on adequate resources that ensure the operation of HB-HTA units. Dimension 4 deals with measuring the short- and long-term impact of the overall performance of HB-HTA units. Finally, nine core guiding principles were selected as essential requirements for HB-HTA units based on the expertise of the HB-HTA units participating in the project.

Conclusions: Guiding principles for good practices set up a benchmark for HB-HTA because they represent the ideal performance of HB-HTA units; nevertheless, when performing HTA at hospital level, context also matters; therefore, they should be adapted to ensure their applicability in the local context.

Objectives: Clinical research data are often collected on paper and later inputted onto an electronic database. This method is time consuming and potentially introduces errors. Therefore, to make primary data collection more efficient and less error prone we aimed to develop a touch-screen application for data collection in a psoriatic arthritis research clinic and compared it with the pre-existing paper-based system.

Methods: We developed a Web application using Java and optimized it for the iPad®. It highlights missing fields for physicians in real time, and only permits submission of data collection form after corrections are made. For its evaluation, seven physicians participated, and before each patient visit they were randomly assigned paper or iPad® data entry. Number of errors, length of visit, and time between clinic visit and completion of data entry were measured.

Results: A total of 106 patients seen in the clinic who agreed to participate were randomly assigned to be evaluated by clinic physicians using the iPad® (fifty-three patients) or a paper protocol (fifty-three patients). On average, 3.34 omissions were found per paper form, of which 2.24 would have been detected on the iPad®. The iPad® increased the mean patient encounter time from 37.2 minutes to 46.5 minutes, but eliminated delay between a clinic visit and its data entry.

Conclusions: Entering data using the iPad® application makes the patient encounter slightly longer, but reduces “missing fields.” It also eliminates the delay between clinic visit and data entry thus improving the efficiency of clinical data capture in a research setting.

Objectives: Lung cancer has been the most common cancer since 1985, accounting for 12–13 percent of cancer cases worldwide. Newer targeted therapies with potential increased survival benefits may not be affordable to patients. Many countries use arbitrary thresholds to determine whether a medical intervention is cost-effective. As such, many effective, albeit expensive, therapies are not being reimbursed. To understand the value placed on effective therapies, this study evaluates the patient and public willingness to pay (WTP) for a quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for lung cancer treatments using Thailand as an example.

Methods: A total of 300 subjects responded to hypothetical lung cancer health states, described by three levels of severity and two levels of side effects, and provided their valuation of the level of quality of life and their WTP to improve from one state to another.

Results: The patients with the lowest income and general public were willing to pay more than twice the threshold for acceptability in Thailand (US Dollar 5,123/QALY [Thai Baht 160,000/QALY]). This increased significantly by wealth category. Patients’ WTP was associated with quality of life, financial difficulties, health insurance, diarrhea, and wealth.

Conclusions: The current study highlights the value patients and general public place on effective lung cancer therapies.

Owing to an editorial error, in the article by Thongprasert et al. (1) in the August 2015 issue of International Journal of Technical Assessment in Health Care, Bruce Crawford was incorrectly listed as the corresponding author. The corresponding author is Unchalee Permsuwan.

Objectives: To describe the first hospital-based health technology assessment (HTA) program in a public hospital in Argentina, and report some clinical, educational, economic and organizational results after 10 years of its implementation.

Methods: A hospital-based HTA program was created in March 2001 at Hospital Garrahan (Buenos Aires, Argentina), a national pediatric facility with a self-managed budget. Its main goal is to promote a rational and evidence-based technologic development. The program consists of HTA reports for technology acquisition, clinical practice guidelines (CPG), capacity building in research and management, and technical support for health services research (HSR). The evaluation cycle comprises: prioritization, evidence synthesis, dissemination and monitoring. We report program performance, comment educational and organizational effects, and discuss unresolved issues and future challenges.

Results: During the first 10 years the program produced 18 HTA reports on drugs (6 = 33 percent), therapeutic (6 = 33 percent), preventive (2 = 11 percent) or diagnostic (2 = 11 percent) procedures and institutional programs (3 = 17 percent). The scope covered effectiveness (12 = 67 percent), safety (10 = 56 percent), budget impact (6 = 33 percent), cost-effectiveness (2 = 11 percent) and organizational impact (3 = 17 percent). Mean time from request to report was 10 months. Eleven pediatric CPGs were submitted to expert consensus and disseminated for full-text Web access. A 1-year course on research and management was completed by 225 professionals in 6 years, and twenty-two projects for HSR were coached.

Conclusions: Our experience shows that an HTA program is both feasible and useful in a public hospital of a developing country. Promotion of hospital-based HTA, professional integration in HTA activities and network collaboration to discuss unresolved issues with colleagues can multiply the benefits and optimize the use of hospital budgets.