IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v265y2020ics0277953620307474.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Modes of coordination for health technology adoption: Health Technology Assessment agencies and Group Procurement Organizations in a polycentric regulatory regime

Author

Listed:
  • Miller, Fiona A.
  • Lehoux, Pascale
  • Rac, Valeria E.
  • Bytautas, Jessica P.
  • Krahn, Murray
  • Peacock, Stuart

Abstract

The challenge of novel and high cost health technologies has encouraged the growth of regulatory agencies such as Health Technology Assessment (HTA) organizations and Group Procurement Organizations (GPO). Yet the existence of several agencies in the same polycentric regulatory regime raises questions about whether and how their work can be coordinated. Drawing on a case study of GPOs and HTA agencies across four provinces in Canada, involving document review and key informant interviews (n = 44) conducted between 2013 and 2016, we explore the separate evolution of these agencies, emerging connections between them for non-drug technologies, and the organizational processes and evaluative judgments that underpin coordination efforts. HTA agencies and GPOs developed separately; connections emerged recently in three provinces and suggest four modes of coordination. One mode aligns most closely with that recommended by health economists and HTA practitioners, whereby HTA precedes procurement, with coverage decisions informing technology acquisition. The second mode is a version of the first, where procurement refers cases to HTA for coverage or technology management support; unlike the first, it recognizes procurement's evaluative strengths. Yet both the first and second modes focus on exceptional cases and will be infrequent. The third mode is more systemic, reflecting a generalized complementary of purpose as public agencies. HTA could support GPOs in contested technology acquisition efforts through timely and responsive input, while procurement could expand HTA's impact and inform HTA's growing interest in responsible innovation and environmental sustainability. The final mode is non-coordination, reflecting the potential for agencies to occupy quite distinct regulatory niches within the same regime. We conclude that consistency and convergence around a single model of resource allocation is not inevitable; nor is it necessary for coordinated effort. Thus, where differences in regulatory practice and epistemology persist, mutual accommodation and shared learning may prove most productive.

Suggested Citation

  • Miller, Fiona A. & Lehoux, Pascale & Rac, Valeria E. & Bytautas, Jessica P. & Krahn, Murray & Peacock, Stuart, 2020. "Modes of coordination for health technology adoption: Health Technology Assessment agencies and Group Procurement Organizations in a polycentric regulatory regime," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:265:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620307474
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113528
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953620307474
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113528?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eddama, Oya & Coast, Joanna, 2008. "A systematic review of the use of economic evaluation in local decision-making," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 129-141, May.
    2. Kastanioti, Catherine & Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Stasinopoulos, Dionysis & Kapetaneas, Nikolaos & Polyzos, Nikolaos, 2013. "Public procurement of health technologies in Greece in an era of economic crisis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(1), pages 7-13.
    3. Grundy, Quinn, 2016. "“Whether something cool is good enough”: The role of evidence, sales representatives and nurses' expertise in hospital purchasing decisions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 82-91.
    4. Miller, Fiona A. & Lehoux, Pascale, 2020. "The innovation impacts of public procurement offices: The case of healthcare procurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    5. Sorenson, Corinna & Kanavos, Panos, 2011. "Medical technology procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 43-50, April.
    6. Barron, Anthony J.G. & Klinger, Corinna & Shah, Sara Mehmood Birchall & Wright, John S.F., 2015. "A regulatory governance perspective on health technology assessment (HTA) in France: The contextual mediation of common functional pressures," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(2), pages 137-146.
    7. repec:bla:glopol:v:8:y:2017:i:s2:p:69-75 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Elvira Uyarra & Kieron Flanagan, 2009. "Understanding the Innovation Impacts of Public Procurement," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 123-143, June.
    9. Panos Kanavos & Olivier Wouters & John S. F. Wright & Anthony J. G. Barron & Sara M. B. Shah & Corinna Klingler, 2017. "Convergence, Divergence and Hybridity: A Regulatory Governance Perspective on Health Technology Assessment in England and Germany," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 8, pages 69-75, March.
    10. Williams, Iestyn P. & Bryan, Stirling, 2007. "Cost-effectiveness analysis and formulary decision making in England: Findings from research," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(10), pages 2116-2129, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rolfstam, Max & Phillips, Wendy & Bakker, Elmer, 2009. "Public Procurement of Innovation Diffusion: Exploring the Role of Institutions and Institutional Coordination," Papers in Innovation Studies 2009/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    2. Simona Baldi & Davide Vannoni, 2014. "The Impact of Centralization, Corruption and Institutional Quality on Procurement Prices: An Application to Pharmaceutical Purchasing in Italy," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 379, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    3. Ivlev, Ilya & Vacek, Jakub & Kneppo, Peter, 2015. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for supporting the selection of medical devices under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 247(1), pages 216-228.
    4. Grepperud, Sverre & Pedersen, Pål Andreas, 2020. "Positioning and negotiations: The case of pharmaceutical pricing," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    5. Nicolas Haber & Mario Fargnoli, 2021. "Sustainable Product-Service Systems Customization: A Case Study Research in the Medical Equipment Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-20, June.
    6. Simona Baldi & Davide Vannoni, 2017. "The impact of centralization on pharmaceutical procurement prices: the role of institutional quality and corruption," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(3), pages 426-438, March.
    7. Eddama, Oya & Coast, Joanna, 2009. "Use of economic evaluation in local health care decision-making in England: A qualitative investigation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 89(3), pages 261-270, March.
    8. Dubas-Jakóbczyk, K. & Albreht, T. & Behmane, D. & Bryndova, L. & Dimova, A. & Džakula, A. & Habicht, T. & Murauskiene, L. & Scîntee, S.G. & Smatana, M. & Velkey, Z. & Quentin, W., 2020. "Hospital reforms in 11 Central and Eastern European countries between 2008 and 2019: a comparative analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(4), pages 368-379.
    9. Callea, Giuditta & Armeni, Patrizio & Marsilio, Marta & Jommi, Claudio & Tarricone, Rosanna, 2017. "The impact of HTA and procurement practices on the selection and prices of medical devices," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 89-95.
    10. Bucciol, Alessandro & Camboni, Riccardo & Valbonesi, Paola, 2020. "Purchasing medical devices: The role of buyer competence and discretion," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C).
    11. Barbara Bini & Milena Vainieri & Sabina Nuti, 2015. "Definizione delle priorit? di intervento in sanit?: approcci socio-tecnici a confronto," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2015(93), pages 49-73.
    12. Coast, Joanna, 2018. "A history that goes hand in hand: Reflections on the development of health economics and the role played by Social Science & Medicine, 1967–2017," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 227-232.
    13. Zhang, Zhaowen & Jiang, Yaohui, 2022. "Can green public procurement change energy efficiency? Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    14. Rocsana Bucea-Manea-Țoniș & Oliva Maria Dourado Martins & Dragan Ilic & Mădălina Belous & Radu Bucea-Manea-Țoniș & Cezar Braicu & Violeta-Elena Simion, 2020. "Green and Sustainable Public Procurement—An Instrument for Nudging Consumer Behavior. A Case Study on Romanian Green Public Agriculture across Different Sectors of Activity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-25, December.
    15. RAITERI Emilio, 2015. "A time to nourish? Evaluating the impact of innovative public procurement on technological generality through patent data," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2015-05, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    16. Paula Cayolla Trindade & Paula Antunes & Paulo Partidário, 2017. "SPP Toolbox: Supporting Sustainable Public Procurement in the Context of Socio-Technical Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-26, December.
    17. Pedro Parreira & Liliana B. Sousa & Inês A. Marques & Paulo Santos-Costa & Sara Cortez & Filipa Carneiro & Arménio Cruz & Anabela Salgueiro-Oliveira, 2020. "Study Protocol for Two-Steps Parallel Randomized Controlled Trial: Pre-Clinical Usability Tests for a New Double-Chamber Syringe," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-11, November.
    18. G. Crea & A. Cavaliere & A. Cozzi, 2019. "Price discrimination in the Italian medical device industry: an empirical analysis," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 36(2), pages 571-608, July.
    19. Matthew Franklin & James Lomas & Gerry Richardson, 2020. "Conducting Value for Money Analyses for Non-randomised Interventional Studies Including Service Evaluations: An Educational Review with Recommendations," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 38(7), pages 665-681, July.
    20. Max Nathan & Emma Vandore, 2013. "Here Be Startups: Exploring a young digital cluster in Inner East London," SERC Discussion Papers 0146, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:265:y:2020:i:c:s0277953620307474. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.