Health technology assessment in Australia
Authors: Brendon J Kearney and Stephen L Blamey
Published online: 21 April 2008
To the Editor: We read with interest the recent editorial and articles on health technology assessment.1-4 We are pleased that the Journal highlighted this important policy process that attempts to ensure that technologies that improve health gain or health care are supported and those that do not contribute to an improved outcome are not supported.
The description of HealthPACT in the editorial1 is not quite accurate in that HealthPACT is a subcommittee of the Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC). Its funding comes through MSAC with some supplementation from the Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Committee. The techniques of early detection and horizon scanning have been developed, and the results of this work are available to the health community of Australia, be it jurisdictional, public, private or specialised. In particular, if promising health care technologies are identified through this process, they are referred to MSAC for a full health technology assessment, thus ensuring that appropriate technologies are identified as early as possible in the technology cycle and are assessed by MSAC for introduction into the health care system.
This horizon-scanning activity does not currently involve drugs or vaccines, and the Australian health care system could benefit from this process, just as the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence in the United Kingdom and the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health undertake comprehensive horizon scanning.
With respect to conflicts of interest, MSAC is very specific at all levels of its operation. At the commencement of every advisory panel and MSAC meeting, the Chair requests declaration of conflicts of interest. These are recorded in the minutes and appropriate decisions are made on the participation of the person declaring a conflict based on an assessment of the issue.
This is formal and explicit, and is on the public record. It is important to state this, as the article by Petherick and colleagues implies that MSAC does not record conflicts of interest.4 In fact, MSAC places great importance on declaration of conflicts of interest.
References
- Jackson TJ. Health technology assessment in Australia: challenges ahead [editorial]. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 262-264. 0_CBBICJJJ
- Walley T. Health technology assessment in England: assessment and appraisal. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 283-285. 0_i1091828
- Hailey DM. Health technology assessment in Canada: diversity and evolution. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 286-288. 0_pgfId-1623784
- Petherick ES, Villanueva EV, Dumville J, et al. An evaluation of methods used in health technology assessments produced for the Medical Services Advisory Committee. Med J Aust 2007; 187: 289-292. 0_i1091832
Opportunities and Challenges to Achieving the Australian Cancer Plan Goal of World Class Health Systems for Optimal Cancer Care
Carolyn Ee, Ria Joseph, Elise Button, Stacey George, Makala Castelli, David Currow, Prue Cormie, Olivia Farrer, Michael Jefford, Nicolas H. Hart, Chad Y. Han, Deidre D. Morgan, Michael P. Osborn, Candice Oster, Joel Rhee, Anna Ugalde, Eric Yeung, Catherine Paterson
Capturing the Benefits of Clinical Quality Registries
Taryn Bessen, Stephen McDonald
Medical Colleges Have an Obligation to Ensure Full Participation in Clinical Quality Registries
Thomas J. Hugh
Getting on the Same Page: Why Australia Needs a National Maternity Early Warning System (MEWS) Chart
Briony A. Cutts, Lucy Bowyer, Nisha Khot, Sandra Lowe, Stefan C. Kane
Data for Equity: Can Linked Administrative Data Inform Pathways to More Equitable Child Health?
Sarah Gray, Shuaijun Guo, Meredith O'Connor, Elodie O'Connor, Katrina Williams, Hannah Badland, Susan Woolfenden, Josie Dickerson, Gerry Redmond, Marnie Downes, Sharon R. Goldfeld
Specialty College Selection: Why Change is Critical to Support a Future Rural Workforce
Matthew R. McGrail, Jenny May AM, Katherine Logan