Health Technology Prioritisation: Which criteria for prioritising new technologies, and what are their relative weights?

Ofra Golan (), Paul Hansen (), Giora Kaplan () and Orna Tal ()
Additional contact information
Ofra Golan: Gertner Institute for Epidemiology & Health Policy Research, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Israel
Paul Hansen: Department of Economics, University of Otago
Giora Kaplan: Gertner Institute for Epidemiology & Health Policy Research, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Israel
Orna Tal: Gertner Institute for Epidemiology & Health Policy Research, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Israel

No 1006, Working Papers from University of Otago, Department of Economics

Abstract: Objectives: To review the criteria and ÔotherÕ considerations used internationally for prioritising new health technologies, and to demonstrate a conjoint-analysis methodology for deriving relative weights for the criteria. Methods: We searched the literature for criteria and other considerations used internationally for prioritising new technologies. For a set of criteria related to the ÔbenefitsÕ from technologies, we used a conjoint-analysis survey with a convenience sample of 74 participants to derive their weights. Results: Covering 11 countries and the US state of Oregon, we distinguished three main groups of criteria: (a) Need, appropriateness and clinical benefits; (b) Efficiency (including cost-effectiveness); and (c) Equality, solidarity and other ethical or social values. For several countries, the quality of the clinical and economic evidence and factors related to strategic issues and procedural justice respectively are also considered. The criteria in the conjoint- analysis survey and their derived weights are: ÔLives savedÕ = 0.343, ÔLife-prolongation benefitsÕ = 0.243, ÔQuality-of-life gainsÕ = 0.217, a criterion representing the availability of alternative treatments = 0.107, and ÔOther important social / ethical benefitsÕ = 0.087. Conclusions: The criteria represented a pluralistic combination of needs-based, maximising and egalitarian principles, and we demonstrated a methodology for deriving their weights based on a conjoint-analysis survey.

Keywords: Health; Priorities; Technology Assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Pages: 20 pages
Date: 2010-07, Revised 2010-07
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.otago.ac.nz/economics/research/otago077133.pdf First version, 2010 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:otg:wpaper:1006

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers from University of Otago, Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Janet Bryant ().