To Fund or Not to Fund
- 1 September 2011
- journal article
- Published by Springer Science and Business Media LLC in PharmacoEconomics
- Vol. 29 (9), 771-780
- https://doi.org/10.2165/11539840-000000000-00000
Abstract
Background: Attempts to improve the acceptability of resource allocation decisions around new health technologies have spanned many years, fields and disciplines. Various theories of decision making have been tested and methods piloted, but, despite their availability, evidence of sustained uptake is limited. Since the challenge of determining which of many technologies to fund is one that healthcare systems have faced since their inception, an analysis of actual processes, criticisms confronted and approaches used to manage them may serve to guide the development of an ‘evidence-informed’ decisionmaking framework for improving the acceptability of decisions. Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop a technology funding decision-making framework informed by the experiences of multiple healthcare systems and the views of senior-level decision makers in Canada. Methods: A 1-day, facilitated workshop was held with 16 senior-level healthcare decision makers in Canada. International examples of actual technology funding decision-making processes were presented. Participants discussed key elements of these processes, debated strengths and weaknesses and highlighted unresolved challenges. The findings were used to construct a technology decision-making framework on which participant feedback was then sought. Its relevance, content, structure and feasibility were further assessed through key informant interviews with ten additional senior-level decision makers. Results: Six main issues surrounding current processes were raised: (i) timeliness; (ii) methodological considerations; (iii) interpretations of value for money; (iv) explication of social values; (v) stakeholder engagement; and (vi) accountability for reasonableness. While no attempt was made to force consensus on what should constitute each of these, there was widespread agreement on questions that must be addressed through a robust process. These questions, grouped and ordered into three phases, became the final framework. Conclusions: A decision-making framework informed by processes in other jurisdictions and the views of local decision makers was developed. Pilot testing underway in one Canadian jurisdiction will identify any further refinements needed to optimize its usefulness.Keywords
This publication has 24 references indexed in Scilit:
- Health Technology Funding Decision-Making Processes Around the WorldPharmacoEconomics, 2011
- Accounting for reasonableness: Exploring the personal internal framework affecting decisions about cancer drug fundingHealth Policy, 2008
- A systematic review of the use of economic evaluation in local decision-makingHealth Policy, 2008
- BEYOND ACCOUNTABILITY FOR REASONABLENESSBioethics, 2008
- Understanding the limited impact of economic evaluation in health care resource allocation: A conceptual frameworkHealth Policy, 2007
- Health technology adoption and the politics of governance in the UKSocial Science & Medicine, 2006
- From the trenches: views from decision-makers on health services priority settingHealth Services Management Research, 2005
- Strategic Decisions of New Technology Adoption under Asymmetric Information: A Game‐Theoretic Model*Decision Sciences, 2003
- Assessing the Value of a New PharmaceuticalMedical Care, 1998
- Mixed-Scanning: A "Third" Approach to Decision-MakingPublic Administration Review, 1967