2010The Medical Journal of AustraliaRequires access

Issues facing the Australian Health Technology Assessment Review of medical technology funding

Susanne P O'Malley

Open publisher page 5 citations

Abstract

The Australian Health Technology Assessment Review has the potential to have a major effect on the availability of new medical technology and the listing of associated medical procedures on the Medicare Benefits Schedule. Despite this, only about 15% of submissions to the Review came from "medical associations". Pharmaceutical and medical technologies are inherently different, and there are a number of difficulties associated with evaluating medical technology using the same process and evidence levels as those used for pharmaceuticals. The current sequential and lengthy processing of new medical technology and procedures is delaying access to beneficial medical technology and could be substantially reduced. There is currently no effective funding process for medical technology classified as capital equipment or consumables and disposables. This has created a perverse incentive in favour of using funded implantable prostheses based on access to funding rather than superior clinical effectiveness. The existing horizon scanning process could be better used to not only identify all potentially cost-effective new and emerging medical technology and procedures as early as possible, but also to identify gaps in the evidence.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The Australian Health Technology Assessment Review has the potential to have a major effect on the availability of new medical technology and the listing of associated medical procedures on the Medicare Benefits Schedule. Despite this, only about 15% of submissions to the Review came from "medical associations". Pharmaceutical and medical technologies are inherently different, and there are a number of difficulties associated with evaluating medical technology using the same process and evidence levels as those used for pharmaceuticals. The current sequential and lengthy processing of new medical technology and procedures is delaying access to beneficial medical technology and could be substantially reduced. There is currently no effective funding process for medical technology classified as capital equipment or consumables and disposables. This has created a perverse incentive in favour of using funded implantable prostheses based on access to funding rather than superior clinical effectiveness. The existing horizon scanning process could be better used to not only identify all potentially cost-effective new and emerging medical technology and procedures as early as possible, but also to identify gaps in the evidence.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 5 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The Australian Health Technology Assessment Review has the potential to have a major effect on the availability of new medical technology and the listing of associated medical procedures on the Medicare Benefits Schedule. Despite this, only about 15% of submissions to the Review came from "medical associations". Pharmaceutical and medical technologies are inherently different, and there are a number of difficulties associated with evaluating medical technology using the same process and evidence levels as those used for pharmaceuticals. The current sequential and lengthy processing of new medical technology and procedures is delaying access to beneficial medical technology and could be substantially reduced. There is currently no effective funding process for medical technology classified as capital equipment or consumables and disposables. This has created a perverse incentive in favour of using funded implantable prostheses based on access to funding rather than superior clinical effectiveness. The existing horizon scanning process could be better used to not only identify all potentially cost-effective new and emerging medical technology and procedures as early as possible, but also to identify gaps in the evidence.

Key concepts: Health technology, Consumables, Business, Incentive, Technology assessment, Emerging technologies, Process (computing), Schedule

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Issues facing the Australian Health Technology Assessment Review of medical technology funding — Research Paper | ScholarLens