Systems thinking in health technology assessment: a scoping review

Abstract

Objective Our objective was to assess how, and to what extent, a systems-level perspective is considered in decision-making processes for health interventions by illustrating how studies define the boundaries of the system in their analyses and by defining the decision-making context in which a systems-level perspective is undertaken. Method We conducted a scoping review following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and EconLit were searched and key search concepts included decision making, system, and integration. Studies were classified according to an interpretation of the “system” of analysis used in each study based on a four-level model of the health system (patient, care team, organization, and/or policy environment) and using categories (based on intervention type and system impacts considered) to describe the decision-making context. Results A total of 2,664 articles were identified and 29 were included for analysis. Most studies (16/29; 55%) considered multiple levels of the health system (i.e., patient, care team, organization, environment) in their analysis and assessed multiple classes of interventions versus a single class of intervention (e.g., pharmaceuticals, screening programs). Approximately half (15/29; 52%) of the studies assessed the influence of policy options on the system as a whole, and the other half assessed the impact of interventions on other phases of the disease pathway or life trajectory (14/29; 48%). Conclusions We found that systems thinking is not common in areas where health technology assessments (HTAs) are typically conducted. Against this background, our study demonstrates the need for future conceptualizations and interpretations of systems thinking in HTA.

The Application of Systems Thinking to the Prevention and Control of Sexually Transmissible Infections among Adolescents and Adults: A Scoping Review

“…[to enhance] both reliability and systematicity of the research" [102]. The difficulties we experienced have been noted in systems thinking reviews in other subject areas [4,103]. For Rusoja and colleagues:…”

Moving from intervention management to disease management: a qualitative study exploring a systems approach to health technology assessment in Canada

“…In response to the needs of individual decision makers, the decision space in HTA is classically concerned with intervention management, and often more narrowly, technology adoption. An alternate way to approach the HTA decision, and one that may respond to shifting priorities, is one of disease management (5). Considering the disease as the unit of analysis for an HTA review may offer opportunities to consider a broader range of alternative interventions (i.e., primary prevention, screening, diagnostics, treatment, management), allow for systematic consideration of upstream interventions, and allow the system to question the optimal management of a disease versus a piecemeal or reactive approach that is characteristic of the current environment (6).…”

Developing a dynamic simulation model to support the nationwide implementation of whole genome sequencing in lung cancer

“…ABM is also an individual-level modeling approach, but its agents are active and may display behavior, unlike in DES. While ABM, DES, and SD are not new, the literature on their application in the context of systems science within health technology assessment is sparse [ 12 ]. One article in the healthcare setting combines SD and ABM to assess the value of mobile stroke units [ 13 ] while considering the disease and population dynamics, the organization of care and its economics.…”