Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Practice Guideline
. 2021 Mar;125(3):307-319.
doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.12.007. Epub 2020 Dec 24.

Uncertainty tolerance among experts involved in drug reimbursement recommendations: Qualitative evidence from HTA committees in Canada and Poland

Affiliations
Practice Guideline

Uncertainty tolerance among experts involved in drug reimbursement recommendations: Qualitative evidence from HTA committees in Canada and Poland

Wiesława Dominika Wranik et al. Health Policy. 2021 Mar.

Abstract

Objectives: Drug reimbursement decisions often rely on health technology assessment (HTA). Increasingly, new drugs have limited clinical evidence and uncertain clinical benefit. Our goal was to describe how members of drug advisory committees and other stakeholders conceptualize and tolerate uncertainty and how they rationalize uncertainty tolerance.

Methods: Our triangulated parallel design applied two qualitative methods. We interviewed 31 members of drug advisory committees in Canada and Poland about their information needs and included hypothetical scenarios with uncertain clinical benefits. Respondents speculated about their likely reimbursement recommendation. We analyzed written recommendations of the pan Canadian Oncology Drug Review for drugs with uncertain benefit and compared initial recommendations to the responses from patient and clinician groups.

Results: Uncertainty tolerance varied among committee members and across jurisdictions. In the scenario analysis, 7 Canadian and 11 Polish respondents leaned against recommending a hypothetical drug with uncertain clinical benefit, whereas 5 Canadian and 5 Polish respondents leaned in favour. Those against rationalized that uncertainty increases potential harm; those in favour rationalized that patients often have no alternatives. The document analysis revealed that patients had higher uncertainty tolerance in general.

Conclusions: Uncertainty tolerance varies among committee members and other stakeholders depending on their backgrounds and on the decision contexts. We argue that policy guidance around uncertainty management could improve the transparency and consistency of recommendations.

Keywords: Drug advisory committees; Health Technology Assessment; Qualitative interviews; Reimbursement recommendations; Uncertainty tolerance.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors report no declarations of interest.

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources