Transcript
Page 1: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

NHSScotland Event Thursday 21 June 2012

Page 2: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Health technologies: making choices, spending wisely and public involvement

Page 3: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Public Involvement in making choices and spending wisely

Helen CaddenChair, Public Involvement Collaborative

Public Partner, Scottish Medicines ConsortiumMember, Scottish Health Council

Richard NorrisDirector, Scottish Health Council

Page 4: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Overarching Medicines and Technologies Group

• To provide strategic oversight of all assessment and advice for health technologies activity within the organisation.

• To facilitate synergy and joint working.• To ensure that Healthcare Improvement Scotland’s health

technologies work is aligned with the NHS Scotland Quality Strategy and the Scottish Government’s strategic approach to health technologies.

Page 5: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Public Involvement Collaborative

• Brings together patient and public representatives• Representative on Overarching Medicines and

Technologies Group• Developing two-way dialogue and identifying public

involvement issues – not just about shadowing Overarching Medicines and Technologies Group

• Agree areas of good practice in patient and public involvement

• Identify any gaps in involvement activities within the current areas of work

Page 6: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Public involvement collaborative structure

Scottish Antimicrobial Prescribing

Group

Patient and Public Involvement Group

Overarching Medicines and Technologies Group

Scottish Health Council

Public Involvement Collaborative

Scottish Health

Technologies Group

Scottish Medicines

Consortium

Scottish Intercollegiate

Guidelines Network

Area Drug and Therapeutic Committee

Representatives

Page 7: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Scottish Health Council

• Set up in 2005 to “support, ensure and monitor” patient focus and public involvement in the NHS

• 14 local offices across Scotland, National Chair and Committee

• Developed and implemented the Participation Standard• Part of Healthcare Improvement Scotland and supports

wider organisation to meet Duty of User Focus• Publications and case studies on website:

http://www.scottishhealthcouncil.org

Page 8: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely
Page 9: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Involving patients in assessing medicines for use in the NHS

• Scottish Medicines Consortium• Patient and Public Involvement Group ensure that the

needs of patients and the wider public are brought into focus during the Scottish Medicines Consortium decision-making process

• Integral part of the process - need a perspective from those who have experience of the disease or condition

• Three Patient and Public Involvement Group representatives on Scottish Medicines Consortium

• Summarise submissions from Patient Interest Groups

Page 10: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Patient interest groups submissions 2010

4

1 1 10

2

5

2 21

5

3

5

1 1 10

3

5

32

1

54

8

3

54

0

6 6 6

3

5

78

Number of Drugs with Patient Interest Groups submissions

actual number of patient interest groups submissions

number of drugs submission to SMC(FULL & RE)

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Page 11: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Patient Interest group submissions 2011

1 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 4 4 21 1 2 23

65

13

56

2

75 4 5

35 6

2

6 64 5

0

2

4

6

8

JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Number of Drugs with Patient Interest Groups submissions

actual number of patient interest groups submissions

Number of submission to SMC(FULL & RE)

Page 12: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Scottish Medicines Consortium Evaluation: Impact of Public Involvement

• October 2003 to December 2007, 117 Patient Interest Group submissions presented for 97 new medicines

• 63% of those submissions supported by a Patient Interest Group were accepted or accepted with restrictions

2008 data

Page 13: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Patient Interest Group submissions January - June 2012

6

5

2

4

5 5

0 0 0 0 0 0

4 4

1

4

3

2

0 0 0 0 0 0

8

6

1

4

3

2

0 0 0 0 0 00

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

jan feb march April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Total Drug Submission to SMC Number of Drug Submission with a PIG

Actul Number of PIGs received

Page 14: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

SMC decisions Jan 2010 - Dec 2011Full and re submission only

accepted; to-tals; 45; 26%

accepted restricted; totals; 54; 32%

not accepted; totals; 71; 42%

Page 15: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Area Drug and Therapeutic Committees

• One in each board – makes local decisions on what medicines are made available

• Individual Patient Treatment Requests• Event in March bringing together Committee members

from across Scotland• Confusion over different terminology in different boards• Variation in how and if members of public are involved• Variation in understanding about decision making• Agreed that Public Involvement Collaborative would

produce Good Practice Toolkit

Page 16: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

‘Disinvestment‘

• What does it mean?• What questions do we ask the public?• How do we ask the public?• Does the public speak with a single voice?• Do we accept what the public say?• Work with National Institute for health and Clinical

Excellence (NICE)

Page 17: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely
Page 18: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely
Page 19: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely
Page 20: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Karen GrahamPatient Involvement Officer, SIGN

Page 21: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

What is SIGN?

• Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network

• Set up in 1993 to produce guidelines for NHSScotland

• Initiative from medical Royal Colleges and other professional organisations

• SIGN has evolved over time to include other healthcare professionals, patients and lay representatives at all stages of our work

Page 22: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

SIGN methodology

• Guidelines are developed by multidisciplinary nationally representative groups

• A systematic review is undertaken to identify and critically appraise the literature

• Recommendations are explicitly linked to the supporting evidence

Page 23: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Health technology : patient versions of guidelines

Page 24: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

What is the purpose of patient versions of guidelines?

• To help patients and carers understand what the latest evidence supports around:

diagnosis, treatment and self-care

• to empower patients to participate fully in decisions around management of their condition in discussion with healthcare professionals

• highlight for patients where there are areas of uncertainty

Page 25: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Developing patient versions with patients and carers

• Sub-group formed from main clinical guideline • Highlight recommendations where there is a choice for

patients or specific actions they may take• Form a question, word an answer• Additional content• Simple language • Draft edited by SIGN

Page 26: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Translation of recommendations into plain English

Recommendation• Patients with diabetes and CKD stages 3-5 should have their

haemoglobin checked at least annually. Erythropoiesis stimulating agents should be considered in all patients with anaemia of chronic kidney disease, including those with diabetic kidney disease.

Translation• If you have advanced chronic kidney disease, you must have your

haemoglobin levels checked at least once a year. You may get medication to help your body to make red blood cells.

Page 27: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Consultation with patients, carers and members of the public

• Draft distributed to relevant voluntary groups and members of the SIGN patient network for comment

• Draft edited and improved based on comments

Page 28: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Ensuring quality of patient versions

• Evidence based

• SIGN editorial group – accurate translation of the evidence?

• Plain English Campaign

Page 29: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

The end result

Page 30: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Ensuring our patient versions are accessible

Page 31: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

How can patient versions of guidelines help to promote patient choice?

• Allows priorities to become clear to patients and carers

• highlight to patients (and healthcare professionals!) those interventions which have the greatest evidence of benefit

• clearly identify treatments for which there is no evidence potentially reducing the use of/demand for unproven therapies

• identify lifestyle interventions and ways in which the patient can take steps to manage their condition potentially reducing unnecessary consultations

Page 32: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

What have clinicians said about our patient versions?

“Give patients clear, unbiased information in relation to therapies available and their effectiveness”

“Using the patient version serves to let people know that there are nationally agreed interventions available”

““The patient version of the ASD guideline is very useful, we aim to give each family a copy. It is reassuring for families to have this information based on the latest evidence. We wouldn’t use anything else”.

Page 33: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

What have patient groups said about our patient versions?

“it answers questions that people go away with but do not actually ask, plus you can go back to it to recap, plus it even answers questions professionals have when asked a question by a carer or patient which can sometimes meet a ‘oh I don’t know’ and the patient, carer leaving with worry”

“”if we were given these, we would need to see our GP less because we would know how to look after ourselves”

Page 34: Parallel Session 2.2 Health Technologies: Making Choices, Spending Wisely

Group Task

• Work in groups to identify from the 4 patient versions provided:

• An area of clinical uncertainty• An intervention with no evidence• An intervention with no evidence of safety• Some indications for self- care• Some well established effective therapies• An area where the patient has a clear choice to make


Recommended