Cargando…
A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea
BACKGROUND: To systematically investigate the current status and methodology of health technology reassessment (HTR) in various countries to draw insights for the healthcare system in South Korea. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on the articles published between January 2000 an...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5106773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27835964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0152-x |
_version_ | 1782467118197899264 |
---|---|
author | Seo, Hyun-Ju Park, Ji Jeong Lee, Seon Heui |
author_facet | Seo, Hyun-Ju Park, Ji Jeong Lee, Seon Heui |
author_sort | Seo, Hyun-Ju |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To systematically investigate the current status and methodology of health technology reassessment (HTR) in various countries to draw insights for the healthcare system in South Korea. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on the articles published between January 2000 and February 2015 on Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PubMed. The titles and abstracts of retrieved records were screened and selected by two independent reviewers. Data related to HTR were extracted using a pre-standardised form. The review was conducted using narrative synthesis to understand and summarise the HTR process and policies. RESULTS: Forty five studies, conducted in seven countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, and the United States of America, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Informed by the literature review, and complemented by informant interviews, we focused on HTR activities in four jurisdictions: the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Spain. There were similarities in the HTR processes, namely the use of existing health technology assessment agencies, reassessment candidate technology identification and priority setting, stakeholder involvement, support for reimbursement coverage, and implementation strategies. Considering the findings of the systematic review in the context of the domestic healthcare environment in Korea, an appropriate HTR model was developed. This model included four stages, those of identification, prioritisation, reassessment and decision. CONCLUSIONS: Disinvestment and reinvestment through the HTR was used to increase the efficiency and quality of care to help patients receive optimal treatment. Based on the lessons learnt from other countries’ experiences, Korea should make efforts to establish an HTR process that optimises the National Healthcare Insurance system through revision of the existing Medical Service Act. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5106773 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51067732016-11-17 A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea Seo, Hyun-Ju Park, Ji Jeong Lee, Seon Heui Health Res Policy Syst Review BACKGROUND: To systematically investigate the current status and methodology of health technology reassessment (HTR) in various countries to draw insights for the healthcare system in South Korea. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted on the articles published between January 2000 and February 2015 on Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, and PubMed. The titles and abstracts of retrieved records were screened and selected by two independent reviewers. Data related to HTR were extracted using a pre-standardised form. The review was conducted using narrative synthesis to understand and summarise the HTR process and policies. RESULTS: Forty five studies, conducted in seven countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, Spain, Sweden, Denmark, and the United States of America, fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Informed by the literature review, and complemented by informant interviews, we focused on HTR activities in four jurisdictions: the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and Spain. There were similarities in the HTR processes, namely the use of existing health technology assessment agencies, reassessment candidate technology identification and priority setting, stakeholder involvement, support for reimbursement coverage, and implementation strategies. Considering the findings of the systematic review in the context of the domestic healthcare environment in Korea, an appropriate HTR model was developed. This model included four stages, those of identification, prioritisation, reassessment and decision. CONCLUSIONS: Disinvestment and reinvestment through the HTR was used to increase the efficiency and quality of care to help patients receive optimal treatment. Based on the lessons learnt from other countries’ experiences, Korea should make efforts to establish an HTR process that optimises the National Healthcare Insurance system through revision of the existing Medical Service Act. BioMed Central 2016-11-11 /pmc/articles/PMC5106773/ /pubmed/27835964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0152-x 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 | Review Seo, Hyun-Ju Park, Ji Jeong Lee, Seon Heui A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title | A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title_full | A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title_fullStr | A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title_full_unstemmed | A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title_short | A systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for South Korea |
title_sort | systematic review on current status of health technology reassessment: insights for south korea |
topic | Review |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5106773/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27835964 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12961-016-0152-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT seohyunju asystematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea AT parkjijeong asystematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea AT leeseonheui asystematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea AT seohyunju systematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea AT parkjijeong systematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea AT leeseonheui systematicreviewoncurrentstatusofhealthtechnologyreassessmentinsightsforsouthkorea |