In September 2019, Regional Methods Council of South East healthcare region released a report where compared the prostate artery embolization (PAE) for benign prostatic hyperplasia with the transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). It was outlined that costs and the need for blood transfusions for PAE are lower than for TURP. The use of registries for follow-up of patients and registration of side effects is strongly recommended.

In Finland, the Health Care Services Selection Council is responsible for making recommendations regarding the research, treatment, and rehabilitation methods. Currently, PALKO is working on the only one assessment related to medical technologies - rehabilitation and treatment of lumbar spine dislocation. In the final report, the Council would conclude whether the procedure is a part of publicly funded services or not.

The German Research Foundation (DFG) has launched a new Artificial Intelligence (AI) imaging priority program "Radiomics: Next Generation Medical Imaging" (“Radiomics: Nächste Generation der medizinischen Bildgebung”). More than 8 million euros will flow into the program in the next three years. The program will be coordinated by the University Hospital Freiburg.

MTRC has developed three reports on the key market access topics, including innovation funding, health technology assessment and funding frameworks for medical devices. These reports help to understand the relevance of these frameworks to certain types of medical technologies, including ENT technologies. This post provides some key facts about the HTA, funding and innovation payment landscape for ENT devices in Europe.

New material codes for extraction catheters were added to the List of reimbursable devices of the Belgian National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (INAMI-RIZIV) in September 2019.

MTRC continues releasing new seminars on the topics on market access. The seminar discusses key stakeholders, money flow, reimbursement in hospital and ambulatory settings, Nomenclature of medical services, specifics of reimbursement processes and the role of HTA.

MTRC continues releasing new seminars on the topics on market access. The seminar discusses key stakeholders, money flow, reimbursement in hospital and ambulatory settings, role of DRG and fee for service model, specifics of reimbursement processes and the role of HTA.

The fee negotiations for the coming year are over - the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Physicians (KBV) and the National Association of Statutory Health Insurance Funds (GKV-Spitzenverband) agreed on an increase in the monetary conversion factor for all medical and psychotherapeutic services in the amount of 1.52 percent. GKV-Spitzenverband and KBV have also agreed to sponsor the video consultations.

In August 2019, the Decision Forum conducted the meeting towards the funding decisions for new methods, where concluded that prehospital CT ("stroke ambulance") for early diagnosis and treatment of suspected stroke can be used within the framework of controlled studies with a sufficient number of patients. The protocol of the Decision Forum meeting was released on the website of the New Method.

MTRC has developed three reports on the key market access topics, including innovation funding, health technology assessment and funding frameworks for medical devices. These reports help to understand the relevance of these frameworks to certain types of medical technologies, including endoscopy technologies. This post provides some key facts about the HTA, funding and innovation payment landscape for endoscopy devices in Europe.

After a long time since the introduction of Healthcare Implementation Communique (SUT) for the first time (2007), the Reimbursement Commission made important changes to the SUT. The main changes relate to higher reimbursement fees for medical devices (reimbursement fees increased depending on the category from 5% to 100%).

In September 2019, the French High Authority for Health (HAS) has released an assessment report regarding the evaluation of total or partial robotic-assisted nephrectomy, compared to open surgery and conventional laparoscopic surgery. Due to the lack of any prospective comparative studies reporting robust results with relevant judgment criteria and collected with appropriate follow-up time, HAS could not comment on the expected service or the expected service improvement of robot-assisted nephrectomy compared to open surgery or conventional laparoscopic surgery.