Country/Region: Thailand
Submission Guidelines

Health Technology Assessment Guideline (2008)
PDF in English

Submission Guidelines Source:

Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand (Vol.91 Suppl.2 June 2008)
http://www.medassocthai.org/journal

Additional Information:
Last Webpage Update: Tuesday, May 17, 2011

Submission Guidelines Key Features:

Key Features:  
Title and year of the document
Health Technology Assessment Guideline (2008) 
Affiliation of authors
Universities, ISPOR, and HITAP (Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program), Ministry of Public Health 
Purpose of the document
Provide methodological and reporting guidelines for economic evaluations of health technology 
Standard reporting format included
Yes 
Disclosure
Yes 
Target audience of funding/ author's interests
Decision makers, researchers, pharmaceutical companies 
Perspective
Costs:Society & Outcomes: perspective depends on the objectives of the study. Use a patient’s perspective when making treatment decisions for the individual patient 
Indication
Approved indication 
Target population
Target population using baseline epidemiologic characteristics of patients should be clearly defined. 
Subgroup analysis
Yes 
Choice of comparator
The characteristics of the alternative should be that of the most commonly used therapy or current practice or the comparator should be the most effective alternative. 
Time horizon
The time horizon should be long enough to capture the full costs and effects of the intervention of the implemented programs. 
Assumptions required
Yes 
Preferred analytical technique
CUA is recommended for Thai HTA guideline to be the method of choice when data and resources are available, or when possible, since it provides a more complete picture than the other alternatives. 
Costs to be included
Costs to be included depend on the study perspective. Direct medical, direct non medical and indirect costs should be included if societal perspective is used. 
Source of costs
There are two alternative sources of cost of medical services used in the valuation: reference unit cost and setting specific unit cost. 
Modeling
Yes 
Systematic review of evidences
Yes, systematic review of the existing clinical and economic studies on the intervention, including unpublished studies and studies with negative results. The search strategy should be reproducible and selection criteria and procedures clearly presented. 
Preference for effectiveness over efficacy
Yes 
Preferred outcome measure
Final outcome parameters: life years gained (CEA) or QALYs gained (CUA) for chronic conditions or other relevant outcome variable, as in the clinical file, for acute conditions. 
Preferred method to derive utility
EQ-5D is the most recommended utility method and other methods (VAS, SG, TTO, HUI, QWB, SF-6D, WTP) can also be used but should be justified. 
Equity issues stated
A QALY is a QALY, no matter to whom it accrues 
Discounting costs
Future costs should be discounted at a rate of 3%. 
Discounting outcomes
Future benefits should be discounted at a rate of 3%. 
Sensitivity analysis-parameters and range
Interval estimates should be presented for each parameter in the economic evaluation. All different aspects of uncertainty in the evaluation should be addressed. Confidence interval around the ICER; Cost-effectiveness plane; cost-effectiveness acceptability curve; Tornado diagrams. 
Sensitivity analysis-methods
Probabilistic sensitivity analyses should be performed on all uncertain parameters in a model. If there is no reported mean (or proportion) or standard error, a one-way sensitivity analysis should be used and a tornado diagram should be presented. 
Presenting results
Results should be presented in a defined form, it should contain both undiscounted and discounted costs, outcomes, incremental costs and incremental outcomes in both aggregated and disaggregated forms 
Incremental analysis
Yes 
Total costs vs effectiveness (cost/effectiveness ratio)
Yes 
Portability of results (Generalizability)
The patient population to which the pharmaco-economic evaluation applies should be consistent with the patient population defined in the clinical part of the reimbursement request submission. 
Financial impact analysis
The potential budgetary impact on public and private healthcare expenditure should be estimated and discussed. This should include the impact on annual budgeting and the cumulative impact over a relevant period. 
Mandatory or recommended or voluntary
Mandatory 

Acknowledgement: Dr. Usa Chaikledkaew highly contributed to this key-feature form. Usa Chaikledkaew PhD, (1) Department of Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand; (2) Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand

Country Selection Page | PE Guidelines Index Page