Health Technology Assessment - Access To Innovative Medicines In The USA And Organization For Economic Cooperation And Development - Poster Presentations S121

Sep 29, 2026

Uploaded by Riley

Health technology assessment (HTA) has increasingly influenced public health insurance reimbursement decisions across many countries over the past decade, shaping whether patients can access newly approved medicines. This study examines how HTA and HTA expansion affect patient access to new medicines across OECD countries. New medicines are identified from major regulators and tracked according to the HTA recommendations issued by relevant HTA bodies.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryHealthcare

FormatPDF

Pages2

Reading Time5 min

AccessFree to download

Poster Presentations S121

Health Technology Assessment: Access To Innovative Medicines In The USA And Organization For Economic Cooperation And Development

Introduction

Methods

PP87 How Innovative Is The Innovation? Early Experience In Assessing The Innovativeness Of Emerging Medical Technologies In Singapore Wing Fai Sofie Ng ([sofie_ng@moh.gov.sg](sofie_ng@moh.gov.sg)), Zhen Long Ng, Hong Ju, Hua Pey Gan and Swee Sung Soon Introduction: The assessment of a technology’s innovativeness, which indicates its capacity to transform practice, is crucial for strategic planning in health care. However, clear assessment criteria are often lacking. This abstract presents the early experience of the Agency for Care Effectiveness with the UK Government’s Medical Technology Innovation Classification Framework to identify innovative medical technologies (MedTechs) anticipated to disrupt clinical practice in Singapore. Methods: ACE’s horizon scanning methodologies were employed to identify innovative MedTechs, based on innovation programs of regulatory bodies, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration breakthrough device designation. The UK Framework was applied, using only the technology aspects (novelty) and not the implementation elements (expected shift in clinical practice) to assess the novelty of MedTechs. Three evaluators independently classified each MedTech as incremental (exists within healthcare system), transformative (novel application of existing technology), or disruptive (first-in-class) based on desktop research. The usability of the classifications was assessed through user experience and inter-rater agreement, with consensus reached for most disagreements. Results: Among 228 innovative MedTechs identified based on regulatory body designations, pre-consensus inter-rater agreement was 76 percent across innovation categories, with higher consistency (89%) for incremental innovations but lower agreement (64%) for transformative and disruptive categories. The inconsistencies stemmed from limited understanding of the use of MedTechs and their expected shift in local clinical practice. Following consensus, 42 percent were classified as incremental and 58 percent as transformative or disruptive. To enhance future usability, transformative and disruptive technologies were combined into a single highly innovative category to expedite categorization. Highly innovative technologies were then prioritized for local clinician input. Conclusions: The UK Framework offers a valuable approach to assess the level of innovativeness of MedTechs. By combining transformative and disruptive technologies into a highly innovative category, ACE could expediently prioritize impactful MedTechs to inform the system on upcoming innovations with disruptive potential. This fit-for-purpose approach could offer resource-constrained health technology assessment bodies a means to assess the innovativeness of MedTechs. PP88 Life Cycle Scientific Advice For Health Technology Assessment In Korea Jihyun Kang ([kjh6590@neca. re.kr](kjh6590@neca. re.kr)), Yujin Kang, Wonjung Choi and Jieun Choi Introduction: Scientific advice (SA) in the process of developing medical devices and technologies (MedTechs) allows manufacturers to target the profile of their production and gain a better understanding of the requirements for approval and reimbursement. The aim of this study was to evaluate the SA framework developed by National Evidence-based Healthcare Collaborating Agency (NECA) in Korea. Methods: We developed the SA program by reviewing all available information regarding the service offered, processes, duration (in weeks), stage of development, types of technologies, and fees. The SA program supports a total of 60 MedTechs per year. By the end of 2023, a total of 150 technologies had participated. We also evaluated participant satisfaction with the SA program after their participation. Results: The NECA SA program offers Evidence Preview, Evidence Search Education, Evidence Development Plans with regulatory advice, and Clinical Expert Advice for clinical trial design. The process is flexible, depending on the app

FAQs

What is the focus of the study on patient access to new medicines?

The study analyzes the impact of HTA and HTA expansion on patient access to new medicines across OECD countries.

How are “new medicines” defined for this analysis?

New medicines are identified as new active substances approved by major regulators and launched globally within the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2023.

Which information is used to determine public health insurance reimbursement?

Public health insurance reimbursement is determined by reviewing HTA recommendations issued by the appropriate HTA bodies.

Sep 29, 2026

Uploaded by Riley