METHODS: A mixed survey questionnaire with open- and closed-ended questions relating to HTA governance, HTA infrastructure, supply and demand of HTA and global HTA networking opportunities in each country was administered electronically to representatives of HTA nodal agencies of all ASEAN members. In-person meetings or email correspondence were used to clarify or validate any unclear responses. Results were collated and presented quantitatively.
RESULTS: Responses from eight out of ten member countries were analysed. The results illustrate that countries in the ASEAN region are at different stages of HTA institutionalization. While Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand have well-established processes and methods for priority setting through HTA, other countries, such as Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, the Philippines and Vietnam, have begun to develop HTA systems in their countries by establishing nodal agencies or conducting ad-hoc activities.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The study provides a general overview of the HTA landscape in ASEAN countries. Systematic efforts to mitigate the gaps between the demand and supply of HTA in each country are required while ensuring adequate participation from stakeholders so that decisions for resource allocation are made in a fair, legitimate and transparent manner and are relevant to each local context.
METHODS: This study is based on the collective and direct experiences of the founding members of the HTAsiaLink Network. Data were collected from presentations they made at various international forums and additional information was reviewed. Data analysis was done using the framework developed by San Martin-Rodriguez et al.Results and Conclusions:HTAsiaLink is a network of health technology assessment (HTA) agencies in Asia established in 2011 with the aim of strengthening individual and institutional HTA capacity, reducing duplication and optimizing resources, transfer and sharing of HTA-related lessons among members, and beyond. During its 6 years, the network has expanded, initiating several capacity building activities and joint-research projects, raising awareness of the importance of HTA within the region and beyond, and gaining global recognition while establishing relationships with other global networks. The study identifies the determinants of success of the collaboration. The systemic factors include the favorable outlook toward HTA as an approach for healthcare priority setting in countries with UHC mandates. On organizational factors, the number of newly established HTA agencies in the region with similar needs for capacity building and peer-to-peer support was catalytic for the network development. The interactional aspects include ownership, trust, and team spirit among network members. The network, however, faces challenges notably, financial sustainability and management of the expanded network.
METHODS: We summarized the HTA process through review of documents and reports available in the public domain combined with the authors' experience.
RESULTS: Health technology assessment plays an integral part in prioritizing treatment in public health facilities in Malaysia, particularly for the Ministry of Health Medicines Formulary (MOHMF). The MOHMF is the reference list of drugs allowed to be prescribed in the Ministry of Health (MOH) facilities. There are 2 organizations within the MOH that conduct HTA as their core activities, namely the Malaysian Health Technology Assessment Section and the Formulary Management Branch of Pharmacy Practice & Development Division. The assessment of pharmaceuticals for the purpose of listing medicines into the MOHMF is under the purview of the Formulary Management Branch. The evidence-based assessment focuses on safety, efficacy, effectiveness, and budget impact of the drug. Cost-effectiveness evidence is currently not mandatory but is of interest to the decision makers. The assessment outcomes are considered by the MOH Medicines List Review Panel for formulary decisions.
CONCLUSIONS: Health technology assessment has supported formulary decisions in MOH. Evidence generation needs to progress beyond efficacy or effectiveness, safety, and budget impact to incorporate cost-effectiveness. Nevertheless, there are challenges to be met to achieve this. The impact of the HTA process is currently unknown and is yet to be evaluated formally.
METHODS: We described the evolution of HTA program in Malaysia based on review of administrative data, publicly available information and quantitative description of impact evaluation.
RESULTS: Health Technology Assessment HTA was formalized in Malaysia in 1995 as a central structure within the Ministry of Health, Malaysia in 1995. Expansion of activities demonstrated over the years including Horizon Scanning of health technologies and implementation of evidence-based Clinical Practice Guidelines. Improvement on the processes in terms of types of report, quality, monitoring, and impact evaluation as well as accessibility was also carried out. Examples of impact/influence of the reports have also been demonstrated.
CONCLUSIONS: HTA program in Malaysia has evolved over the past decades. Its role in policy formulation and decision making of health technologies has become more significant over the years and is foreseen to be bigger in the future. As a trusted source of evidence, HTA in Malaysia will continue to strengthen the health system by advocating informed decision making and value-based medicine. As other countries in this region is trying to establish their own HTA processes and procedures, this review on the evolution of the HTA program in Malaysia might give some insights on developing a sustainable HTA program.
METHODS: Health policy experts from the public and private sectors were asked to participate in a survey to explore the current and future status of HTA implementation in Jordan. Semistructured interviews with senior policy makers supported by literature review were conducted to validate survey results and make recommendations for specific actions.
RESULTS: Survey and interview results indicated a need for increased HTA training, including both short courses and academic programs and gradually increasing public funding for technology assessment and appraisal. Multiple HTA bodies with central coordination can be the most feasible format of HTA institutionalization. The weight of cost-effectiveness criterion based on local data with published reports and explicit decision thresholds should be increased in policy decisions of pharmaceutical and nonpharmaceutical technologies.
CONCLUSION: Currently, HTA has limited impact on health policy decisions in Jordan, and when it is used to support pharmaceutical reimbursement decisions, it is mainly based on results from other countries without considering transferability of international evidence. Policy makers should facilitate HTA institutionalization and use in policy decisions by increasing the weight of local evidence in HTA recommendations.