Capacity Building for Health Technology Assessment in Jordan: Institutionalization and Its Use in Pricing and Reimbursement Decisions.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the process of the institutionalization of health technology assessment (HTA) in Jordan. In particular, this study presents local policy perspectives on capacity building for HTA and the progress made toward its use in pricing and reimbursement decisions. HTA CAPACITY BUILDING: University-based education and professional development training in pharmacoeconomics and pharmaceutical policy have been the starting points to create a receptive environment, necessary expertise, and local tools across many settings in Jordan. International collaboration with HTA supporting bodies helped to build connections and informed policy development on local levels through projects, meetings, and discussions. HTA INSTITUTIONALIZATION AND ITS USE IN PRICING AND REIMBURSEMENT DECISIONS: Institutionalizing HTA in the King Hussein Cancer Center and the Royal Medical Services was the driving factor for HTA implementation and practice advancement; nevertheless, process transparency and experience sharing through reports and publications are still limited. The Jordan Food and Drug Administration's pricing and formulary decisions require pharmacoeconomic consultation in selected cases according to the Jordanian Drug Law. Nevertheless, there is a lack of local methodological guidelines for conducting HTA. In addition, HTA practitioners and the regulatory scope of future HTA activities in Jordan cannot be determined yet. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS: Over the past 2 decades, Jordan has crossed a number of milestones and advanced further to implement HTA as a tool for evaluating health interventions. As a next step, legislation is needed to mandate the use of HTA and to enhance transparency in decision-making processes.

Drug Selection for Formulary Inclusion: An Exploratory Case Study of Oncology Medicines in Jordan.

BACKGROUND: Access to healthcare services including innovative treatments is one of the most important objectives of healthcare system in Jordan. This research summarized one of the actual practices pertaining to health priority setting in Jordan with official requirement to use cost-effectiveness analysis. OBJECTIVES: To address the role of economic evidence to inform the decisions and rationales drawn by health policy experts to optimize resources mobilization for new cancer drugs. METHOD: The research reported a case study of formulary setting priority in Jordan. Documentary collation and analysis of a secondary source (meeting minutes) produced by decision committee were conducted by the research team. The decisions and rationales shaped by panelists for 22 newly registered oncology drugs at Jordan Food and Drug Administration were reviewed and described. RESULTS: It was found that the absence of official health economic guidelines in the country and informal use of cost-effectiveness analysis by the panelists appeared to flaw the importance of incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Nevertheless, "the lower the ICER, the better the drug" was the primary factor in all committee's decisions to inform resources mobilization. Despite of the latter, 7 drugs were selected for formulary inclusion for different oncology disease areas in Jordan. CONCLUSIONS: Priority setting for new cancer drugs is not well-informed in Jordan. Nevertheless, this research revealed different disadvantages that appear to militate against the perspective of the study. Recommendations for implementation and enhancement of health economic evaluation include further investment in capacity building (eg, prepare qualified health economists) and create incentive to improve availability and accessibility of local data.