Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Int J Technol Assess Health Care ; 40(1): e26, 2024 Jul 02.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38953740

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study investigated how patient representatives have experienced their involvement in medicines appraisal and reimbursement processes with the Council for Choices in Health Care in Finland (COHERE) and the Pharmaceuticals Pricing Board (PPB) and how authorities perceive the role of patient organizations' input. METHODS: Semi-structured thematic individual and pair interviews were conducted in 2021 with representatives (n = 14) of patient organizations and government officials (n = 7) of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Health. The interview data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Patient representatives expressed their appreciation for the PPB and the COHERE in creating consultation processes and systematic models that support involvement. However, there were many challenges: patient representatives were uncertain about how their submissions were utilized in official processes and whether their opinions had any significance in decision-making. Patients or patient organizations lack representation in appraisal and decision-making bodies, and patient representatives felt that decision-making lacked transparency. The importance of patient involvement was highlighted by the authorities, but they also emphasized that the patient organizations' contributions were complementary to the other materials. Submissions regarding the medications used to treat rare diseases and those with limited research evidence were considered particularly valuable. However, the submissions may not necessarily have a direct impact on decisions. CONCLUSIONS: The interviews provided relevant input for the development of involvement processes at the PPB and COHERE. The interviews confirmed the need for increased transparency in the medicines assessment, appraisal, and decision-making procedures in Finland.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Qualitativa , Finlândia , Humanos , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica/organização & administração , Participação do Paciente , Entrevistas como Assunto , Tomada de Decisões , Mecanismo de Reembolso/organização & administração
2.
BMJ Open ; 12(5): e053693, 2022 05 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35534065

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: This study explored self-reported knowledge and interest to learn more about medicines research, development and health technology assessment among Finnish general public. It also aimed to define possible knowledge gaps and needs for public education regarding these topics. DESIGN: Online survey with 503 participants. The questionnaire was originally developed as a part of the Needs Assessment Work Package of the European Patients' Academy on Therapeutic Innovation Project. The survey was carried out in Finland in 2019. METHODS: The survey was conducted as an online survey by Kantar TNS Gallup Forum online panel. The data were analysed by using the freely available programming language R. Relationships between the demographic characteristics (such as age, gender and education level) of respondents and their knowledge or interest in medicines research and development were determined using Pearson's χ2 tests. Statistically significant responses of demographic characteristics in the respondents' knowledge or interest in medicines research were determined by logistic regression. RESULTS: Of the 503 respondents (age 16-64) only 12% reported having good or very good knowledge of medicines research and development in general. Regarding health technology assessment, pharmacoeconomics and regulation, the percentage of respondents reporting good or very good knowledge was as low as 8%. Respondents were most interested in learning more about predictive and personalised medicine (47%) and least interested in medicines regulation (30%) and pharmacoeconomics (31%). CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported knowledge about medicines research and development and health technology assessment appears to be very low in Finland. Patient and public participation is recognised as an important and essential element in up-to-date medical research and assessment of new treatments. In order to participate as an active and equal partner in these processes, the public needs more information and education in these topics.


Assuntos
Pesquisa Biomédica , Avaliação da Tecnologia Biomédica , Adolescente , Adulto , Finlândia , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Avaliação das Necessidades , Inquéritos e Questionários , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA