Methods for evaluating environmental sustainability in health technology assessment: views of stakeholders

Abstract Incorporating environmental sustainability into health technology assessment (HTA) is increasingly important for aligning with government targets, healthcare policies, and healthcare professional bodies endorsing the use of more sustainable health technologies, while maintaining clinical effectiveness and value for money. Although proposals exist to include environmental criteria in HTA, methodological development in this area remains limited. This study explored stakeholder perspectives on useful methods, frameworks and challenges for assessing environmental outcomes in HTA. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight stakeholders including HTA decision makers, industry representatives, sustainability professionals, and academics from different jurisdictions to ensure diverse views and cross-setting applicability. Data were analysed thematically to identify opportunities, barriers and facilitators for methodological development. Stakeholders broadly supported integrating environmental outcomes into HTA, with carbon footprint highlighted as a key measurable and decision-relevant indicator. Environmental life cycle assessment was considered useful for quantifying emissions and identifying hotspots, but barriers included limited environmental data, lack of methodological consensus on scope and boundaries, and resource and expertise constraints. Broader environmental outcomes, such as impacts on resource use, biodiversity, and health, were also seen as important where evidence is available. Suggested approaches included carbon costing within economic evaluation, multi-criteria decision analysis, expert consensus, and weighting of highly polluting technologies to address trade-offs. Stakeholders emphasised the need to understand societal preferences for environmental gains, including willingness to pay or trade-off health benefits. This novel research provides the first qualitative insights into multidisciplinary stakeholder views on environmental sustainability in HTA, identifying both opportunities and challenges for methodological innovation and policy development.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Health
Published
2026-02-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/2752-5309/ae476f
Primary Topic
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Methods for evaluating environmental sustainability in health technology assessment: views of stakeholders

Emma Bishop, Emily Gregg, Melissa Pegg, Janet Bouttell
Environmental Research Health
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
article

Methods for evaluating environmental sustainability in health technology assessment: views of stakeholders

Emma Bishop, Emily Gregg, Melissa Pegg, Janet Bouttell
article en

Abstract

Abstract Incorporating environmental sustainability into health technology assessment (HTA) is increasingly important for aligning with government targets, healthcare policies, and healthcare professional bodies endorsing the use of more sustainable health technologies, while maintaining clinical effectiveness and value for money. Although proposals exist to include environmental criteria in HTA, methodological development in this area remains limited. This study explored stakeholder perspectives on useful methods, frameworks and challenges for assessing environmental outcomes in HTA. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight stakeholders including HTA decision makers, industry representatives, sustainability professionals, and academics from different jurisdictions to ensure diverse views and cross-setting applicability. Data were analysed thematically to identify opportunities, barriers and facilitators for methodological development. Stakeholders broadly supported integrating environmental outcomes into HTA, with carbon footprint highlighted as a key measurable and decision-relevant indicator. Environmental life cycle assessment was considered useful for quantifying emissions and identifying hotspots, but barriers included limited environmental data, lack of methodological consensus on scope and boundaries, and resource and expertise constraints. Broader environmental outcomes, such as impacts on resource use, biodiversity, and health, were also seen as important where evidence is available. Suggested approaches included carbon costing within economic evaluation, multi-criteria decision analysis, expert consensus, and weighting of highly polluting technologies to address trade-offs. Stakeholders emphasised the need to understand societal preferences for environmental gains, including willingness to pay or trade-off health benefits. This novel research provides the first qualitative insights into multidisciplinary stakeholder views on environmental sustainability in HTA, identifying both opportunities and challenges for methodological innovation and policy development.

Environmental Research HealthVol. 4(1)
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust (GB), University of Nottingham (GB), Leeds and York Partnership NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University of York (GB), University of Glasgow (GB)
Responsible consumption and production
Openalex Percentile: Top 54%
Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
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.