Cargando…
Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey
BACKGROUND: The European-study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco (EQUIPT) project aimed to study transferability of economic evidence by co-creating the Tobacco Return On Investment (ROI) tool, previously developed in the United Kingdom, for four sample countries (Germa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27230485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7 |
_version_ | 1782434178228289536 |
---|---|
author | Vokó, Zoltan Cheung, Kei Long Józwiak-Hagymásy, Judit Wolfenstetter, Silke Jones, Teresa Muñoz, Celia Evers, Silvia M.A.A. Hiligsmann, Mickaël de Vries, Hein Pokhrel, Subhash |
author_facet | Vokó, Zoltan Cheung, Kei Long Józwiak-Hagymásy, Judit Wolfenstetter, Silke Jones, Teresa Muñoz, Celia Evers, Silvia M.A.A. Hiligsmann, Mickaël de Vries, Hein Pokhrel, Subhash |
author_sort | Vokó, Zoltan |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The European-study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco (EQUIPT) project aimed to study transferability of economic evidence by co-creating the Tobacco Return On Investment (ROI) tool, previously developed in the United Kingdom, for four sample countries (Germany, Hungary, Spain and the Netherlands). The EQUIPT tool provides policymakers and stakeholders with customized information about the economic and wider returns on the investment in evidence-based tobacco control, including smoking cessation interventions. A Stakeholder Interview Survey was developed to engage with the stakeholders in early phases of the development and country adaptation of the ROI tool. The survey assessed stakeholders’ information needs, awareness about underlying principles used in economic analyses, opinion about the importance, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tobacco control interventions, and willingness to use a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) tool such as the ROI tool. METHODS: A cross sectional study using a mixed method approach was conducted among participating stakeholders in the sample countries and the United Kingdom. The individual questionnaire contained open-ended questions as well as single choice and 7- or 3-point Likert-scale questions. The results corresponding to the priority and needs assessment and to the awareness of stakeholders about underlying principles used in economic analysis are analysed by country and stakeholder categories. RESULTS: Stakeholders considered it important that the decisions on the investments in tobacco control interventions should be supported by scientific evidence, including prevalence of smoking, cost of smoking, quality of life, mortality due to smoking, and effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and budget impact of smoking cessation interventions. The proposed ROI tool was required to provide this granularity of information. The majority of the stakeholders were aware of the general principles of economic analyses used in decision making contexts but they did not appear to have in-depth knowledge about specific technical details. Generally, stakeholders’ answers showed larger variability by country than by stakeholder category. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders across different European countries viewed the use of HTA evidence to be an important factor in their decision-making process. Further, they considered themselves to be capable of interpreting the results from a ROI tool and were highly motivated to use it. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4882811 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-48828112016-05-28 Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey Vokó, Zoltan Cheung, Kei Long Józwiak-Hagymásy, Judit Wolfenstetter, Silke Jones, Teresa Muñoz, Celia Evers, Silvia M.A.A. Hiligsmann, Mickaël de Vries, Hein Pokhrel, Subhash Health Res Policy Syst Research BACKGROUND: The European-study on Quantifying Utility of Investment in Protection from Tobacco (EQUIPT) project aimed to study transferability of economic evidence by co-creating the Tobacco Return On Investment (ROI) tool, previously developed in the United Kingdom, for four sample countries (Germany, Hungary, Spain and the Netherlands). The EQUIPT tool provides policymakers and stakeholders with customized information about the economic and wider returns on the investment in evidence-based tobacco control, including smoking cessation interventions. A Stakeholder Interview Survey was developed to engage with the stakeholders in early phases of the development and country adaptation of the ROI tool. The survey assessed stakeholders’ information needs, awareness about underlying principles used in economic analyses, opinion about the importance, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tobacco control interventions, and willingness to use a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) tool such as the ROI tool. METHODS: A cross sectional study using a mixed method approach was conducted among participating stakeholders in the sample countries and the United Kingdom. The individual questionnaire contained open-ended questions as well as single choice and 7- or 3-point Likert-scale questions. The results corresponding to the priority and needs assessment and to the awareness of stakeholders about underlying principles used in economic analysis are analysed by country and stakeholder categories. RESULTS: Stakeholders considered it important that the decisions on the investments in tobacco control interventions should be supported by scientific evidence, including prevalence of smoking, cost of smoking, quality of life, mortality due to smoking, and effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and budget impact of smoking cessation interventions. The proposed ROI tool was required to provide this granularity of information. The majority of the stakeholders were aware of the general principles of economic analyses used in decision making contexts but they did not appear to have in-depth knowledge about specific technical details. Generally, stakeholders’ answers showed larger variability by country than by stakeholder category. CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholders across different European countries viewed the use of HTA evidence to be an important factor in their decision-making process. Further, they considered themselves to be capable of interpreting the results from a ROI tool and were highly motivated to use it. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-05-26 /pmc/articles/PMC4882811/ /pubmed/27230485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7 Text en © The Author(s). 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Vokó, Zoltan Cheung, Kei Long Józwiak-Hagymásy, Judit Wolfenstetter, Silke Jones, Teresa Muñoz, Celia Evers, Silvia M.A.A. Hiligsmann, Mickaël de Vries, Hein Pokhrel, Subhash Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title | Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title_full | Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title_fullStr | Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title_full_unstemmed | Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title_short | Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey |
title_sort | similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using health technology assessment (hta) information across five european countries: results from the equipt survey |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882811/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27230485 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0110-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vokozoltan similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT cheungkeilong similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT jozwiakhagymasyjudit similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT wolfenstettersilke similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT jonesteresa similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT munozcelia similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT everssilviamaa similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT hiligsmannmickael similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT devrieshein similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT pokhrelsubhash similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey AT similaritiesanddifferencesbetweenstakeholdersopinionsonusinghealthtechnologyassessmenthtainformationacrossfiveeuropeancountriesresultsfromtheequiptsurvey |