Current Trends in Public Sector Research. Proceedings of the 24th International Conference



Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is one of the tools that can be used to support rational and objective decision-making in healthcare in the endeavour to contain public expenditure while maintaining the availability of healthcare interventions. The complex process of HTA often struggles to find its place in public policies and faces pressure from various stakeholders. HTA has existed since the 1970s and as a formal process has its roots in the United States. During the 1980s, HTA began to spread outside the US and over the next twenty years, reached almost all European countries, including some countries in Central Europe.
The rise of HTA brought about an exponential increase in the empirical studies of HTA available in academic databases. This study reviews the available literature to analyse the development and research topics and the potential pitfalls of HTA implementation.

Klíčová slova

Health technology assessment, pharmacoeconomics, Czech health policy, public health economics


[1] ADAMS, M. E., McCALL, N. T., GRAY, D. T., ORZA, M. J., & CHALMERS, T. C. (1992). Economic analysis in randomized control trials. Medical care, 231-243.


[2] BANTA, D. (2003). The development of health technology assessment. Health policy, 63(2), 121-132.


[3] BANTA, H. D., & Luce, B. R. (1993). Health care technology and its assessment: an international perspective.


[4] BATTISTA, R. N., & HODGE, M. J. (1999). The evolving paradigm of health technology assessment: reflections for the millennium. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 160(10), 1464.ERO, L. A.,


[5] GRILLI, R., GRIMSHAW, J. M., HARVEY, E., OXMAN, A. D., & THOMSON, M. A. (1998). Closing the gap between research and practice: an overview of systematic reviews of interventions to promote the implementation of research findings. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 317(7156), 465.


[6] BIRCH, S., & DONALDSON, C. (1987). Applications of cost-benefit analysis to health care: departures from welfare economic theory. Journal of Health Economics, 6(3), 211-225.


[7] BODENHEIMER, T. "High and rising health care costs. Part 2: technologic innovation." Annals of internal medicine 142.11 (2005): 932-93


[8] BRIGGS, A. H., WONDERLING, D. E., & MOONEY, C. Z. (1997). Pulling cost‐effectiveness analysis up by its bootstraps: A non‐parametric approach to confidence interval estimation. Health economics, 6(4), 327-340.<327::AID-HEC282>3.0.CO;2-W


[9] BRIGGS, A., SCULPHER, M., & BUXTON, M. (1994). Uncertainty in the economic evaluation of health care technologies: the role of sensitivity analysis. Health economics, 3(2), 95-104.


[10] BROOKERS, S. T., WHITLEY, E., PETERS, T. J., MULHERAN, P. A., EGGER, M., & DAVEY, SMITH, G. (2001). Subgroup analyses in randomised controlled trials: quantifying the risks of false-positives and false-negatives. Health Technology Assessment, 5(33), 1-56.


[11] CARLSSON, P. Health technology assessment and priority setting for health policy in Sweden. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care 2004, 20, 44-54.


[12] CHURCHILL, R., HUNOT, V., CORNEY, R., KNAPP M., McGUIRE, H., TYLEE, A., & WESSELY, S. (2002). A systematic review of controlled trials of the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of brief psychological treatments for depression. Health Technology Assessment, 5(35), 1-173. Q


[13] CLAXTON, K., GINNELLY, L., SCLPHER, M., PHILIPS, Z., & PALMER, S. (2004). A pilot study on the use of decision theory and value of information analysis as part of the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme. Health Technol Assess, 8(31), 1-103.


[14] COCHRANE A. Effectiveness and efficiency. Abingdon: Burgess & Son, 1972:11.


[15] DAUBEN, H., & RüTHER, A. (2000). Health Technology Assessment: Cookbook Medicine with a New Name? Health Economics in Prevention and Care,1(2), 134-139.


[16] DONALDSON, C., CURRIE, G., & MITTON, C. (2002). Cost effectiveness analysis in health care: contraindications. BMJ: British Medical Journal, 325(7369), 891.


[17] DRUMMOND, M. F., & DAVIES, L. (1991). Economic analysis alongside clinical trials: revisiting the methodological issues. International journal of technology assessment in health care, 7(4), 561-573.


[18] DRUMMOND, M. F., & McGUIRE, A. (2001). Economic evaluation in health care: merging theory with practice. OUP Oxford.


[19] DRUMMOND, M. F., SCULPHER, M. J., CLAXTON, K., STODDAART, G. L., & TORRANCE, G. W. (2015). Methods for the economic evaluation of health care programmes. Oxford university press.


[20] DRUMMOND, M., Brandt, A., Luce, B., & ROVIRA, J. (1993). Standardizing methodologies for economic evaluation in health care: practice, problems, and potential. International journal of technology assessment in health care, 9(01), 26-36.


[21] DRUMMOND, M., JÖNSSON, B., RUTTEN, F., & Stargardt, T. (2011). Reimbursement of pharmaceuticals: reference pricing versus health technology assessment. The European Journal of Health Economics, 12(3), 263-271.


[22] DRUMMOND, Michael F. "Principles of economic appraisal in health care." (1980).


[23] EGGER, M., Juni, P., Bartlett, C., Holenstein, F., & Sterne, J. (2003). How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study.


[24] EICHLER, H. G., Kong, S. X., Gerth, W. C., Mavros, P., & Jönsson, B. (2004). Use of cost-effectiveness analysis in health-care resource allocation decision-making: how are cost-effectiveness thresholds expected to emerge? Value in health, 7(5), 518-528.


[25] ELIXHAUSER, A. (Ed.). (1993). Health Care Cost Benefit and Cost Effectiveness Analysis:(CBA/CEA); from 1979 to 1990: A Bibliography. Lippincott.


[26] FELDSSEIN, , M. S. (1963). Economic analysis, operational research, and the National Health Service. Oxford Economic Papers, 15(1), 19-31.


[27] FITZPATRICK, R., DAVEY, C., BUXTON, M. J., & JONES, D. R. (1998). Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials.


[28] GARRATTINI, L., & CASADEI, G. (2008). Health Technology Assessment: For Whom the Bell Tolls? The European Journal of Health Economics, 9(4), 311-312


[29] GARRATTINI, L., & Casadei, G. (2008). Health Technology Assessment: For Whom the Bell Tolls? The European Journal of Health Economics, 9(4), 311-312.


[30] GARRIDO, M. V. (2008). Health technology assessment and health policy-making in Europe: current status, challenges and potential (No. 14). WHO Regional Office Europe.


[31] HANNEY, S., BUXTON, M., GREEN, C., COULSON, D., & Raftery, J. (2007). An assessment of the impact of the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme.


[32] Hirst, A., Dutton, S., Wu, O., Briggs, A., Edwards, C., Waldenmaier, L., ... & McPherson, K. (2008). A multi-centre retrospective cohort study comparing the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of hysterectomy and uterine artery embolisation for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids: the HOPEFUL study. Health Technology Assessment, 12(5).


[33] JOHANNESSON, M., & JÖNSSON, B. (1991). Economic evaluation in health care: is there a role for cost-benefit analysis? Health policy, 17(1), 1-23.


[34] JONES-LEE, M. W. (1976). The value of life: an economic analysis.


[35] KAPUR, A. (2007). Economic analysis of diabetes care. Indian Journal of Medical Research, 125(3), 473.


[36] KLARMAN, H. E. (1982). The road to cost-effectiveness analysis. The Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly. Health and Society, 585-603.


[37] LAUPACIS, A., FEENY, D., DETSKY, A. S., & TUGWELL, P. X. (1992). How attractive does a new technology have to be to warrant adoption and utilization? Tentative guidelines for using clinical and economic evaluations. CMAJ: Canadian Medical Association Journal, 146(4), 473.


[38] LAUPACIS, A., KEOWN, P., PUS, N., KRUEGER, H., FERGUSSON, B., WONG, C., & MUIRHEAD, N. (1996). A study of the quality of life and cost-utility of renal transplantation. Kidney International, 50(1), 235-242.


[39] MURPHY, E., DINGWALL, R., GREATBATCH, D., PARKER, S., & WATSON, P. (1998). Qualitative research methods in health technology assessment: a review of the literature.


[40] Office of Technology Assessment. Assessing the efficacy and safety of medical technologies. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978.


[41] Office of Technology Assessment. Development of medical technology: opportunities for assessment. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976


[42] Office of Technology Assessment. Policy implications of the computed tomography (CT) scanner. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978.


[43] Office of Technology Assessment. Strategies for medical technology assessment. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.


[44] Office of Technology Assessment. The implications of cost-effectiveness analysis of medical technology. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.


[45] Office of Technology Assessment: opportunities for assessment. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976


[46] PEEK, G. J., MUGFORD, M., TRIRUVOIPATI, R., WILSON A., (2009). Efficacy and economic assessment of conventional ventilatory support versus extracorporeal membrane oxygenation for severe adult respiratory failure (CESAR): a multicentre randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England), 374(9698), 1351-1363.


[47] PHILIPS, Z., BOJKE, L., SCULPHER, M., CLAXTON, K., & GOLDER, S. (2006). Good practice guidelines for decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. Pharmacoeconomics, 24(4), 355-371.


[48] RAFTERY, J., Roderick, P. and Stevens, A. (2005) Potential use of routine databases in health technology assessment Health Technology Assessment, 9, (20), pp. 1-106.


[49] Ramsay, C. R., Grant, A. M., Wallace, S. A., Garthwaite, P. H., Monk, A. F., & Russell, I. T. (2001). Statistical assessment of the learning curves of health technologies. Health Technology Assessment Programme.


[50] RAMSAYA, C. R., MATOWE, L., GRILLI, R., GRIMSHAW, J. (2003). Interrupted time series designs in health technology assessment: lessons from two systematic reviews of behavior change strategies. International journal of technology assessment in health care, 19(4), 613.


[51] ROBINSON, R. (1993). Economic evaluation and health care. What does it mean? Bmj, 307(6905), 670-673.


[52] ROYLE, P., & Waugh, N. (2003). Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessment reports carried out for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence appraisal system. Health Technology Assessment, 7(34).


[53] SCULPHER, M. J., Claxton, K., Drummond, M., & McCabe, C. (2006). Whither trial‐based economic evaluation for health care decision making? Health economics, 15(7), 677-687.


[54] SCULPHER, M., DRUMMOND, M., & BUXTON, M. (1997). The iterative use of economic evaluation as part of the process of health technology assessment. Journal of Health Services Research, 2(1), 26-30.


[55] SIEGEL, J. E., WEINSTEIN, M. C., Russell, L. B., & Gold, M. R. (1996). Recommendations for reporting cost-effectiveness analyses. Jama, 276(16), 1339-1341.


[56] SILVER, G. (1983). Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 2(3), 471-471. doi:10.2307/3324470


[57] STONE, P. W., BRACCIA, D., & LARSON, E. (2005). Systematic review of economic analyses of health care-associated infections. American journal of infection control, 33(9), 501-509.


[58] STRAUS, S. E., & JONES, G. (2004). What has evidence based medicine done for us?


[59] Van HOUT, B. A., Al, M. J., GORDER, G. S., & RUTTEN, F. F. (1994). Costs, effects and C/E‐ratios alongside a clinical trial. Health economics, 3(5), 309-319.


[60] WARNER, K., & HUTTON, R. (1980). Cost-Benefit and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in Health Care: Growth and Composition of the Literature. Medical Care, 18(11), 1069-1084. Retrieved from


[61] WATT, A., et al. "Rapid reviews versus full systematic reviews: an inventory of current methods and practice in health technology assessment." International journal of technology assessment in health care 24.02 (2008): 133-139.


[62] WEISBROD, BURTON A. "The health care quadrilemma: an essay on technological change, insurance, quality of care, and cost containment." Journal of economic literature 29.2 (1991): 523-552.