The Value of Explicit, Deliberative, and Context-Specified Ethics Analysis for Health Technology Assessment: Evidence From a Novel Approach Piloted in South Africa.


Journal

Value in health regional issues
ISSN: 2212-1102
Titre abrégé: Value Health Reg Issues
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101592642

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Mar 2023
Historique:
received: 25 03 2022
revised: 26 09 2022
accepted: 25 10 2022
pubmed: 2 12 2022
medline: 8 3 2023
entrez: 1 12 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

This article explores the perceived value, including associated strengths and challenges, of using a context-specified ethics framework to guide deliberative health technology appraisals. The South African Values and Ethics for Universal Health Coverage (SAVE-UHC) approach, piloted in South Africa, consisted of 2 phases: (1) convening a national multistakeholder working group to develop a provisional ethics framework and (2) testing the provisional ethics framework through simulated health technology assessment appraisal committee meetings (SACs). Three SACs each reviewed 2 case studies of sample health interventions using the framework. Participants completed postappraisal questionnaires and engaged in focus group discussions. The SACs involved 27 participants across 3 provinces. Findings from the postappraisal questionnaires demonstrated general support for the SAVE-UHC approach and content of the framework, high levels of satisfaction with the recommendations produced, and general sentiment that participants were able to actively contribute to appraisals. Qualitative data showed participants perceived using a context-specified ethics framework in deliberative decision making: (1) supported wider consideration of and deliberation about morally relevant features of the health coverage decisions, thereby contributing to quality of appraisals; (2) could improve transparency; and (3) offered benefits to those directly involved in the priority-setting process. Participants also identified some challenges and concerns associated with the approach. The SAVE-UHC approach presents a novel way to develop and pilot a locally contextualized, explicit ethics framework for health priority setting. This work highlights how the combination of a context-specified ethics framework and structured deliberative appraisals can contribute to the quality of health technology appraisals and transparency of health priority setting.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36455448
pii: S2212-1099(22)00190-X
doi: 10.1016/j.vhri.2022.10.003
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

23-30

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 International Society for Health Economics and Outcomes Research. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Carleigh B Krubiner (CB)

Center for Global Development, Washington, DC, USA; Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA. Electronic address: carleigh.krubiner@gmail.com.

Aviva Tugendhaft (A)

South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Michael J DiStefano (MJ)

Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Nicola W Barsdorf (NW)

Office of Research Integrity and Ethics, Division for Research Development, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.

Maria W Merritt (MW)

Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA; Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Susan J Goldstein (SJ)

South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Atiya Mosam (A)

South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Sunita Potgieter (S)

Office of Research Integrity and Ethics, Division for Research Development, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa.

Karen J Hofman (KJ)

South African Medical Research Council (SAMRC)/Wits Centre for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS, School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.

Ruth R Faden (RR)

Berman Institute of Bioethics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH