Summary of India’s institutionalisation of EIPS in healthcare, 2016 and 2023
| Statement | Implementation stage | |||||
| None | Policy | Legislative | Operational | Implemented partially | Implemented fully | |
| Decisions | ||||||
| When deciding which health technologies to reimburse using public funds, health economic evidence on the respective health technologies/interventions is considered in the decision. | Statement is mapped to the implementation stage based on information in official documents for each of six types of health technologies: medicines, vaccines, medical procedures, diagnostic tests, medical devices different from diagnostic tests, public health programmes. | |||||
| Pharmaceuticals | ||||||
| Vaccines | Not assessed | |||||
| Medical procedures | ||||||
| Medical devices | ||||||
| Diagnostic tests | ||||||
| Population health interventions | No change | |||||
| When negotiating prices as part of a public procurement procedure for health technologies, health economic evidence on the respective health technologies is considered in price negotiations. | Statement is mapped to the implementation stage based on information in official documents for each of four types of health technologies: medicines, vaccines, diagnostic tests and medical devices different from diagnostic tests. | |||||
| Pharmaceuticals | ||||||
| Vaccines | Not assessed | |||||
| Medical devices | ||||||
| Diagnostic tests | ||||||
| Enabling factors | Each statement is mapped to the implementation stage based on information in official documents. | |||||
| Organisational structures are in place with the mandate to generate health economic evidence on health technologies. | ||||||
| Organisational structures are in place with the mandate to interpret health economic evidence on health technologies and make recommendations or resource allocation decisions. | ||||||
| Formal linkages are in place to bring together producers and users of health economic evidence on health technologies. | ||||||
| The government funds organisational structures to produce and/or use health economic evidence on health technologies to inform resource allocation decisions. | ||||||
| Soft infrastructure is in place (eg, cost databases, methods guide, rules-based thresholds, health-related quality-of-life tariffs) to support producers/users of health economic evidence for resource allocation decisions. | ||||||
| When deciding which health technologies to reimburse using public funds, relevant health system stakeholders have their perspectives heard. | ||||||
Yellow and brown cells depict the level of progress in 2016 and 2023, respectively. The implementation stages mean the following: None: there is no documentary evidence of any intent or application towards EIPS in healthcare. Policy: there is documentary evidence of political intent or statement in the direction of institutionalising EIPS (eg, the country has an HTA strategy). Being at this stage is scored lower because such policy commitments are usually non-binding. Legislative: there is documentary evidence reflecting a binding commitment for EIPS (eg, laws, decrees, directives). Being at this stage is scored higher than in Policy, however, legislation usually does not include explicit, actionable steps that can guide implementation. Operational: there is documentary evidence which operationalises policy and legislation (eg, standard operating procedures, manuals, norms). Being at this stage is scored higher than in Legislative, however, there is still no evidence of EIPS implementation. Partial implementation: there is documentary evidence attesting that in some cases (eg, pilots, ad hoc) decisions are being implemented or EIPS enabling factors are being enacted. Full implementation: there is documentary evidence attesting that implementation occurs as intended in most instances. This stage receives the highest score.
EIPS, evidence-informed priority-setting.