Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T22:30:52.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

OP105 Disinvestment Toolkit: Patients Involvement In Disinvestment Activities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2019

Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Introduction:

Patients are the people who, with their informed consent, receive medical interventions. It is important, therefore, that patients have an understanding of interventions and their potential as a treatment for their condition. Patients are becoming more informed about their health care and the treatments that are available to them. At a population level, the potential benefits and harms of treatments need to be regularly assessed. This is part of healthcare decision making at a policy level about what treatments are publically available. As technology develops and old methods are replaced by new and evidence-based interventions and procedures, healthcare payers look to streamline their payment schedules and disinvest in old technologies and procedures. Some users of health care are reluctant to let go of outmoded methods, so disinvestment is best achieved through transparent processes. Successful engagement with key stakeholders of health care, engaging with payers, health service administrators, clinicians and patients, can facilitate implementation of disinvestment processes.

Methods:

To assist in this process, Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) Interest Groups and EuroScan have come together to develop the following key points to consider in the involvement and engagement of clinicians, patients, and the public in the disinvestment of services and technologies.

Results:

The best time to involve clinicians and patient representatives is right at the beginning of the process. Clinicians and patients can make valuable contributions as advisory committee members. The disinvestment processes may be led by clinicians, payers, or independent organizations. This will likely influence commitment of clinicians to the process.

Conclusions:

Broader consultation with clinicians, patients and the public in the development and consideration of draft reports and recommendations can increase the transparency of the disinvestment process. Consultation is an important means of obtaining buy in. Feedback needs to be seen as taken seriously, and explanations given for any changes made or not made to the report and its recommendations.

Type
Oral Presentations
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018