French National Authority for Health assessment of metabolic surgery for type 2 diabetes remission-A meta-analysis in patients with class I to III obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have demonstrated the superiority of metabolic surgery (MS) over medical therapy (MT) in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes, leading, to a joint statement in 2016 proposing MS to patients with class I obesity and uncontrolled glycemia. Yet, these RCTs included few patients with class I obesity (body mass index 30-35 kg/m2) and even fewer patients with overweight. Our aim was to provide an updated systematic review (SR) with meta-analysis (MA) of RCTs reporting diabetes remission (DR) after MS in these patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included in the SR with MA only RCTs with at least 24-month follow-up found in Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, and LiSSA between January 2008 and September 2022 comparing DR post-MT versus post-MS. We calculated relative risk (RR) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel random-effects approach to examine differences in DR between patients allocated to MS versus MT. RESULTS: DR was significantly higher in MS versus MT after 36 months' follow-up in patients with obesity (RR = 6.65 [95 %CI 2.24;19.79]; I² = 27 %; 5 trials, 404 patients), but also specifically in patients with class I obesity (RR = 5.27 [1.31;21.23]; I² = 0 %; 4 trials, 80 patients). Furthermore, and in line with previous results, all additional MAs performed in patients with obesity in this work favor MS (specifically Roux-en-Y gastric bypass) over MT at 24, 36 (only) and 60 months of follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although the data available in patients with class I obesity and type 2 diabetes remains limited, MA shows higher rates of DR after MS compared with MT after 36 months' follow-up in these patients. Consequently, the French National Authority for Health French (HAS) recommends MS for these patients.

Organisational impact: Definition and assessment methods for medical devices.

Health technology assessment (HTA) is a rapidly developing area and the value of taking non-clinical fields into consideration is growing. Although the health-economic aspect is commonly recognised, evaluating organisational impact has not been studied nearly as much. The goal of this work was to provide a definition of organisational impact in the sector of medical devices by defining its contours and exploring the evaluation methods specific to this field. Following an analysis of the literature concerning the impact of technologies on organisations as well as the medical literature, and also after reviewing the regulatory texts in this respect, the group of experts identified 12 types of organisational impact. A number of medical devices were carefully screened using the criteria grid, which proved to be operational and to differentiate properly. From the analysis of the practice and of the methods described, the group was then able to derive a few guidelines to successfully evaluate organisational impact. This work shows that taking organisational impact into consideration may be critical alongside of the other criteria currently in favour (clinically and economically). What remains is to confer a role in the decision-making process on this factor and one that meets the economic efficiency principle.

Assessment and non-clinical impact of medical devices.

Medical devices (MDs) cover a wide variety of products. They accompany changes in medical practice in step with technology innovations. Innovations in the field of MDs can improve the conditions of use of health technology and/or modify the organisation of care beyond the strict diagnostic or therapeutic benefit for the patients. However, these non purely clinical criteria seem to be only rarely documented or taken into account in the assessment of MDs during reimbursement decisions at national level or for formulary listing by hospitals even though multidimensional models for the assessment of health technologies have been developed that take into account the views of all stakeholders in the healthcare system In this article, after summarising the background concerning the assessment of health technologies in France, a definition of non-clinical criteria for the assessment of MDs is proposed and a decision tree for the assessment of MDs is described. Future lines of approach are proposed as a conclusion.

Post-approval studies in France, challenges facing medical devices.

Medical devices are characterized notably by a wide heterogeneity (from tongue depressors to hip prostheses, and from non-implantable to invasive devices), a short life cycle with recurrent incremental innovations (from 18 months to 5 years), and an operator-dependent nature. The objective of the current round table was to develop proposals and recommendations concerning the prerequisites needed in order to meet the French health authorities expectations concerning requests for post-approval studies for medical devices, required in cases where short and long-term consequences are unknown. These studies, which are the responsibility of the manufacturer or the distributor of the medical device, are designed to confirm the role of the medical device in the therapeutic management strategy in a real-life setting. There are currently approximately 150 post-approval studies underway, mainly concerning class III devices, and the majority face difficulties implementing the study or meeting the study objectives. In light of this, the round table endeavored to clearly identify the conditions for implementation of post-approval studies specific to the characteristics of medical devices. Various areas of progress have been envisaged to improve the performance of these studies, and by consequence, the efficiency of reimbursement of medical devices by the national health insurance. These include providing manufacturers with the opportunity to better anticipate post-approval requirements, defining a study-specific primary objective, integrating a phase allowing dialogue between the manufacturer, the health authorities and the scientific committee, and increasing awareness and training of health professionals on the impact of post-approval clinical studies in terms of the reimbursement of medical devices by the national insurance.

Scientific evaluation and pricing of medical devices and associated procedures in France.

Medical devices are many and various, ranging from tongue spatulas to implantable or invasive devices and imaging machines; their lifetimes are short, between 18 months and 5 years, due to incessant incremental innovation; and they are operator-dependent: in general, the clinical user performs a fitting procedure (hip implant or pacemaker), a therapeutic procedure using a non-implantable invasive device (arrhythmic site ablation probe, angioplasty balloon, extension spondyloplasty system, etc.) or follow-up of an active implanted device (long-term follow-up of an implanted cardiac defibrillator or of a deep brain stimulator in Parkinson's patients). A round-table held during the XXVIII(th) Giens Workshops meeting focused on the methodology of scientific evaluation of medical devices and the associated procedures with a view to their pricing and financing by the French National Health Insurance system. The working hypothesis was that the available data-set was sufficient for and compatible with scientific evaluation with clinical benefit. Post-registration studies, although contributing to the continuity of assessment, were not dealt with. Moreover, the focus was restricted to devices used in health establishments, where the association between devices and technical medical procedures is optimally representative. An update of the multiple regulatory protocols governing medical devices and procedures is provided. Issues more specifically related to procedures as such, to non-implantable devices and to innovative devices are then dealt with, and the proposals and discussion points raised at the round-table for each of these three areas are presented.

Web-based toolkit to facilitate European collaboration on evidence generation on promising health technologies.

BACKGROUND: Several countries have developed policy frameworks allowing timely access to promising health technologies on the condition that additional evidence is generated. However, an important barrier to evidence generation is the lack of structured collaboration among health technology assessment (HTA) agencies. OBJECTIVES: One of the aims of Work Package 7 (WP7) of the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) Project was to determine the types of structured collaboration that could facilitate evidence generation and to develop a Web-based toolkit to support such collaboration. METHODS: Collaboration modalities were defined by all WP7 Partners. Initial emphasis was on information sharing. Standardized forms for information sharing were developed and tested. An information technology development phase followed with the creation of the Web-based toolkit (Web site). RESULTS: Three levels of collaboration were agreed on: (i) sharing information, (ii) coordinated action, and (iii) joint action. The Web site allows access to structured and standardized forms for requesting information, posting information in response to a request, and posting information spontaneously. An online database contains all of the information requested or posted. Pilot tests on twenty-one promising technologies were satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: This new Web site for sharing information on evidence generation should help countries reach robust decisions on the timely adoption of promising health technologies. It will only become fully operational if EUnetHTA Partners supply relevant, accurate, and updated information, and regularly use the Web site.

A common policy framework for evidence generation on promising health technologies.

BACKGROUND: Generation of additional evidence may be necessary to access new promising technologies (marketing approval or coverage). Access with evidence generation (AEG) is a more recent concept with regard to coverage than to marketing approval. OBJECTIVES: One aim of Work Package 7 (WP7) Strand A of the European network for Health Technology Assessment (EUnetHTA) was to provide an overview of national AEG mechanisms associated with marketing approvals and funding or coverage decisions. METHODS: A systematic literature review, surveys of WP7 Partners, and consultation of key people were used to obtain information on the AEG mechanisms used by twenty-three countries (twenty European countries, United States, Canada [Ontario], and Australia). RESULTS: Interest in the implementation of AEG policies, particularly at the coverage decision stage, is growing. An overview of national experiences was used to draw up a generally applicable five-step policy framework for AEG mechanisms that comprised (i) a first assessment identifying knowledge gaps; (ii) a decision conditional to evidence generation; (iii) generation of the evidence requested; (iv) re-assessment integrating the new evidence; (v) a revised decision. The critical factors for success that were identified were coordination, methodological guidance, funding, and a regulatory framework. Countries were categorized on the basis of current implementation of the proposed policy framework. CONCLUSIONS: International collaboration is necessary to gather a critical mass of high-quality data quickly and to ensure timely access to new promising technologies. The overview produced by WP7A has led to development of tools to facilitate collaboration on evidence generation.