Abstract
Introduction Health technology assessment (HTA) is an area that remains less implemented in low- and lower middle-income countries. The aim of the study is to understand the perceptions of stakeholders in Uganda towards HTA and its role in decision making, in order to inform its potential implementation in the country.
Methods The study takes a cross-sectional mixed methods approach, utilising an adapted version of an International Decision Support Initiative questionnaire with both semi-structured and open-ended questions. We interviewed thirty key informants from different stakeholder institutions in Uganda that have decision making roles in the health sector.
Results All participants perceived HTA as an important tool for decision making. Allocative efficiency was regarded as the most important use of HTA receiving the highest average score (8.8 out of 10), followed by quality of healthcare (7.8/10), transparency (7.6/10), budget control (7.5/10) and equity (6.5/10). There was concern that some of the uses of HTA may not be achieved in reality if there was political interference during the HTA process. The technology areas that interviewees highlighted as needing HTA type evaluations urgently were identified as medicines (60.0% of the participants), diagnostics (53.3%), vaccines (40.0%), and public health programs (26.7%). The study participants identified development partners as the most likely potential users of HTA (66.7% of participants), followed by Ministry of Health (43.3%).
Conclusion Interviewed stakeholders in Uganda viewed the role of HTA positively, suggesting that there exists a promising environment for the establishment and operationalisation of HTA as a tool for decision making within the health sector. However, sustainable development and application of HTA in Uganda will require adequate capacity both to undertake HTAs and to support their use and uptake.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was supported by the International Decision Support Initiative, which is funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation (OPP1202541).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Higher Degrees Research and Ethics Committee (HDREC) of Makerere University School of Public Health gave ethical approval for this work (SPH-2021-15). The ethics committee of London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine gave ethical approval for this work (LSHTM Ethics Ref: 26615).
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
↵Ω Joint first authors
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
