PD206 Health Technology Assessment And Decision-Making During The COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis Of Processes And Results From 25 Health Ministries

Introduction The decision-making process in public administration can be analyzed from different perspectives. Evidence-based policies are not the only support for public policy design. High variability was observed regarding the health technologies used during pandemics. The processes and results of decision-making on health technologies in 25 health ministries in Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic were analyzed. Methods This retrospective study utilized triangulation of quantitative and qualitative methods. Information was retrieved for the years 2020 to 2021 through document review of official web pages, surveys, and interviews with decision-makers and advisors of the national ministry of health and 24 Argentinian provinces. Recommendations and reimbursement policies for seven health technologies were considered as tracers. Official health technology assessment (HTA) reports, laws, judicial rulings, journalistic news, and civil society actions on social networks and the internet regarding these technologies were analyzed. The ruling political party in each province was mapped, with the aim of exploring the political influences and intervening actors. Results Contrary to World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, ivermectin, inhaled ibuprofen, convalescent plasma, and equine serum were widely recommended and reimbursed outside a clinical trial context by most of the Argentinian ministries of health, leading to risks for patients and a huge opportunity cost. Health ministries with institutionalized HTA units had significantly higher adherence to WHO recommendations than other health ministries. Legislative and judicial powers influenced the use of health technologies through laws and judicial rulings. Researchers and civil society also influenced decision-makers. Partisan political issues did not fully explain the heterogeneity of the decisions made by the health ministries during the pandemic. Conclusions The impact of HTA organizations and their technical reports was limited. Health Ministries with institutionalized HTA units were more likely to adhere to WHO recommendations. The influence of different technical and political criteria, power relations within and outside the administrations, the pharmaceutical industry and academics, the media, social pressure, judicial and legislative powers, and the political context strongly influenced decision-making.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0266462324004288
Primary Topic
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

PD206 Health Technology Assessment And Decision-Making During The COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis Of Processes And Results From 25 Health Ministries

Anabel Angélica Beliera, Jorgelina Alvarez, Santiago Hasdeu, Julián Sánchez Viamonte
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
article

PD206 Health Technology Assessment And Decision-Making During The COVID-19 Pandemic: Analysis Of Processes And Results From 25 Health Ministries

Anabel Angélica Beliera, Jorgelina Alvarez, Santiago Hasdeu, Julián Sánchez Viamonte
article en

Abstract

Introduction The decision-making process in public administration can be analyzed from different perspectives. Evidence-based policies are not the only support for public policy design. High variability was observed regarding the health technologies used during pandemics. The processes and results of decision-making on health technologies in 25 health ministries in Argentina during the COVID-19 pandemic were analyzed. Methods This retrospective study utilized triangulation of quantitative and qualitative methods. Information was retrieved for the years 2020 to 2021 through document review of official web pages, surveys, and interviews with decision-makers and advisors of the national ministry of health and 24 Argentinian provinces. Recommendations and reimbursement policies for seven health technologies were considered as tracers. Official health technology assessment (HTA) reports, laws, judicial rulings, journalistic news, and civil society actions on social networks and the internet regarding these technologies were analyzed. The ruling political party in each province was mapped, with the aim of exploring the political influences and intervening actors. Results Contrary to World Health Organization (WHO) recommendations, ivermectin, inhaled ibuprofen, convalescent plasma, and equine serum were widely recommended and reimbursed outside a clinical trial context by most of the Argentinian ministries of health, leading to risks for patients and a huge opportunity cost. Health ministries with institutionalized HTA units had significantly higher adherence to WHO recommendations than other health ministries. Legislative and judicial powers influenced the use of health technologies through laws and judicial rulings. Researchers and civil society also influenced decision-makers. Partisan political issues did not fully explain the heterogeneity of the decisions made by the health ministries during the pandemic. Conclusions The impact of HTA organizations and their technical reports was limited. Health Ministries with institutionalized HTA units were more likely to adhere to WHO recommendations. The influence of different technical and political criteria, power relations within and outside the administrations, the pharmaceutical industry and academics, the media, social pressure, judicial and legislative powers, and the political context strongly influenced decision-making.

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health CareVol. 40(S1)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 65%
Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.