Olga Löblová
Central European University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Olga Löblová.
European Journal of Health Economics | 2014
László Gulácsi; Alexandru M. Rotar; Maciej Niewada; Olga Löblová; Fanni Rencz; Guenka Petrova; I Boncz; Niek Sebastian Klazinga
This paper describes and discusses the development and use of health technology assessment (HTA) in five Central and Eastern European countries (CEE): Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria. It provides a general snapshot of HTA policies in the selected CEE countries to date by focusing on country case-studies based on document analysis and expert opinion. It offers an overview of similarities and differences between the individual CEE countries and discusses in detail the role of HTA by assessing its formalization and institutionalization, standardization of methodology, the use of HTA in practice and the degree of professionalization of HTA in the region. It finds that HTA has been to some extent implemented in all five countries studied, with methodologies in accordance with international standards, but that challenges remain when it comes to the role of HTA in health care decision-making as well as to human resource capacities of the countries. This paper suggests that coming years will show whether CEE countries develop adequate national analytical capacity to assess and appraise technologies in the context of local need and affordability, instead of using HTA as a mere administrative procedure to fulfill (inter)national requirements. Finally, suggestions are provided to strengthen HTA in CEE countries through cooperation, mutual learning, a common accreditation of HTA bodies and increased network building among CEE HTA experts.
PLOS ONE | 2014
Wim Van Biesen; Sabine N. van der Veer; Mark Murphey; Olga Löblová; Simon J. Davies
Background Selection of an appropriate renal replacement modality is of utmost importance for patients with end stage renal disease. Previous studies showed provision of information to and free modality choice by patients to be suboptimal. Therefore, the European Kidney Patients’ Federation (CEAPIR) explored European patients’ perceptions regarding information, education and involvement on the modality selection process. Methods CEAPIR developed a survey, which was disseminated by the national kidney patient organisations in Europe. Results In total, 3867 patients from 36 countries completed the survey. Respondents were either on in-centre haemodialysis (53%) or had a functioning graft (38%) at the time of survey. The majority (78%) evaluated the general information about kidney disease and treatment as helpful, but 39% did not recall being told about alternative treatment options than their current one. Respondents were more often satisfied with information provided on in-centre haemodialysis (90%) and transplantation (87%) than with information provided on peritoneal dialysis (79%) or home haemodialysis (61%), and were more satisfied with information from health care professionals vs other sources such as social media. Most (75%) felt they had been involved in treatment selection, 29% perceived they had no free choice. Involvement in modality selection was associated with enhanced satisfaction with treatment (OR 3.13; 95% CI 2.72–3.60). Many respondents (64%) could not remember receiving education on how to manage their kidney disease in daily life. Perceptions on information seem to differ between countries. Conclusions Kidney patients reported to be overall satisfied with the information they received on their disease and treatment, although information seemed mostly to have been focused on one modality. Patients involved in modality selection were more satisfied with their treatment. However, in the perception of the patients, the freedom to choose an alternative modality showed room for improvement.
Health Economics, Policy and Law | 2016
Olga Löblová
In the past two decades, setting up independent health technology assessment (HTA) agencies has become a popular tool to inform reimbursement decision-making in health care, spreading from Northern European countries across Western Europe but much less so to post-communist countries. Structural political science explanations leave gaps in clarifying this diffusion pattern. This paper proposes a theoretical model focusing on the influence of domestic epistemic communities mitigating policy diffusion. Based on a review of HTA institutions in the EU, it proposes a chronological taxonomy of HTA agencies in Europe (the forerunners, the mainstreamers and the non-adopters) and asks why there is such an important East-West divide. The paper discusses theoretical explanations from different literatures, finding unsatisfactory many traditional political science answers such as the degree of centralization of a countrys health system, its financial organization (Bismarckian or Beveridgian), the attitude toward independent regulatory bodies in general, the influence of international actors, or lack of resources. Finally, it suggests cases for empirical testing of the domestic epistemic communities model.
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy | 2018
Olga Löblová
Health technology assessment (HTA) has over the past three decades become a well-established part of decisions about allocation of resources in many countries. Despite this, little is known about HTA’s impact on health systems. Few studies have evaluated the benefits of HTA for health outcomes, for access to care or for public budgets. In contrast, HTA has relatively clear upfront costs, which could potentially discourage policy-makers from establishing HTA agencies, especially in low income countries with restricted resources. It may be premature, though, to dismiss this approach altogether, as less tangible modernizing goals are still significant.
PharmacoEconomics | 2017
Alessandra Ferrario; Diāna Arāja; Tomasz Bochenek; Tarik Čatić; Dávid Dankó; Maria Dimitrova; Jurij Fürst; Ieva Greičiūtė-Kuprijanov; Iris Hoxha; Arianit Jakupi; Erki Laidmäe; Olga Löblová; Ileana Mardare; Vanda Markovic-Pekovic; Dmitry Meshkov; Tanja Novakovic; Guenka Petrova; Maciej Pomorski; Dominik Tomek; Luka Vončina; Alan Haycox; Panos Kanavos; Patricia Vella Bonanno; Brian Godman
Comparative European Politics | 2017
Scott L. Greer; Olga Löblová
Policy Studies Journal | 2018
Olga Löblová
Health Policy | 2018
Alexandru M. Rotar; Alin Preda; Olga Löblová; Vanesa Benkovic; Szymon Zawodnik; László Gulácsi; Maciej Niewada; I Boncz; Guenka Petrova; Maria Dimitrova; Niek Sieds Klazinga
Health Economics, Policy and Law | 2017
Olga Löblová
Health Economics, Policy and Law | 2016
Olga Löblová