What could health technology assessment learn from living clinical practice guidelines?

Front Pharmacol. 2023 Aug 24:14:1234414. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1234414. eCollection 2023.

Abstract

A "living" approach to clinical practice guidelines is when the identification, appraisal and synthesis of evidence is maintained and repeated at an agreed frequency, with a clear process for when and how new evidence is to be incorporated. The value of a living approach to guidelines was emphasised during the COVID-19 pandemic when health professionals and policymakers needed to make decisions regarding patient care in the context of a nascent but rapidly evolving evidence base. In this perspective, we draw on our recent experience developing Australian and international living guidelines and reflect on the feasibility of applying living guideline methods and processes to a lifecycle approach to health technology assessment (HTA). We believe the opportunities and challenges of adopting a living approach in HTA fall into five key themes: identification, appraisal and synthesis of evidence; optimising the frequency of updates; embedding ongoing multi-stakeholder engagement; linking the emergence of new evidence to reimbursement; and system capacity to support a living approach. We acknowledge that the suitability of specific living approaches to HTA will be heavily influenced by the type of health technology, its intended use in the health system, local reimbursement pathways, and other policy settings. But we believe that the methods and processes applied successfully to guideline development to manage evidentiary uncertainty could be applied in the context of HTA and reimbursement decision-making to help manage similar sources of uncertainty.

Keywords: clinical practical guidelines; health technolgy assessment; lifecycle HTA; living systematic review (LSR); regulatory policies and structures; reimbursement pathways.

Grants and funding

In the last five years the following authors have received funding to develop the following clinical practice guidelines (with funding sources): Cheyne, Chakraborty, Norris, Campbell, Turner for the Australian COVID-19 living guidelines (Australian Living Evidence Consortium for the development of the COVID-19 Guidelines, Walter Cottman Endowment Fund, managed by Equity Trustees for the development of the MPX Guidelines, Australian Government DHAC, Victorian Government Department of Health and Human Services, The Ian Potter Foundation, Walter Cottman Endowment Fund, managed by Equity Trustees, Lord Mayors' Charitable Foundation); Turner for the MPX guidelines (Walter Cottman Endowment Fund, managed by Equity Trustees), Turner for guidelines supported by the Australian Living Evidence Consortium (Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, Victorian Government Department of Health and Human Services, The Ian Potter Foundation, Lord Mayors' Charitable Foundation, Gandel Foundation); Campbell, Norris for the Australian Perinatal Mental Health Guidelines (Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care); Campbell, Lewis, Norris for the Australian endometriosis guidelines (Australian government Department of Health and Aged Care); Campbell for the mild traumatic brain injury guidelines (Australian Government research grant, MRF2008070); Chakraborty for the Clinical Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Work-related Mental Health Guidelines in General Practice (Australian Government Department of Jobs and Small Business and Comcare, Office of Industrial Relations – Queensland Government, State Insurance Regulatory Authority, ReturntoWorkSA and WorkCover WA).