Introduction and uptake of new medical technologies in the Australian health care system: A qualitative study

The development of funding recommendations for health technologies at the state level: A South Australian case study

“…Decision makers at the state‐level have little assurance that future evidence will emerge if they reject a technology and therefore need to balance the potential benefits of approval to current patients against the benefits to future patients offered by the more robust evidence base that can result from withholding approval . A lack of evidence, or poor‐quality evidence, is a problem that also affects MSAC and PBAC, but these committees are able to contract independent HTA agencies to conduct assessments of technologies or provide critiques of sponsor‐prepared applications that can identify and quantify uncertainty. Moreover, because of the ability of MSAC and PBAC to affect total utilisation they may have more influence on industry research agendas.…”

“…Much less is published about the criteria, evidence, and standards that inform decision making at the sub‐national level in Australia and, indeed, at comparable jurisdictional levels internationally. Decision makers at the local (eg, Local Health Network) and state level frequently receive requests for the coverage of health technologies which have been approved for marketing by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, but which have not been evaluated at the national level . Some technologies may never be submitted by manufacturers for consideration at the national level due to the costs involved in submission, long timeframes for assessment, or insufficient evidence to inform a national evaluation (as in the case of some rare medical conditions).…”

The impact of orthopaedic research evidence on health financing in Australia

“…This is especially pertinent in the Australian context, as Australia’s MBS subsidises healthcare costs for both public and private services [ 9 ]. MSAC approval and subsequent access to MBS funding has been viewed as important for the widespread distribution of available technologies [ 10 ]. Without MBS funding for the surgical service, its availability to the general public may be limited and clinical decision-making may thus be a moot point.…”

“…Specifically, it is the Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC) which advises the Minister for Health on the listing of MBS subsidies for orthopaedic technologies other than prostheses. MSAC approval, and the subsequent access to public funding, is the crucial facilitator of the uptake of the new technology in Australia and important for widespread consumer uptake [ 10 ].…”

Quality of Health Technology Assessment Reports Prepared for the Medical Services Advisory Committee

“…Stakeholders in Australia have voiced concerns over perceived inconsistencies between evidence, expert opinion and MBS funding decisions (4;9), and raised questions of political pressure in decision making (10;18). This emphasizes the importance of defensible funding decisions, but research on the quality of HTA reports prepared for MSAC is limited.…”