OBJECTIVE: This study aims to highlight the gaps in HTA requirements and existence of heterogeneity in HTA practices in 10 selected APAC countries in comparison to HTA practices in Europe, Canada, and U.S.

METHODS: A comparison of good practices in application of HTA for decision-making was carried out through a review of ISPOR’s comparative table of pharmacoeconomic guidelines, published- and grey-literature. A set of 15 principles prepared by the International Working Group were predefined for relative qualitative scoring and a scoring matrix was developed to benchmark the strength of HTA in each country.

RESULTS: The findings of this paper reveal that developed markets such as Europe and Canada have deployed HTA over the last three decades to inform health policy and reimbursement decision-making, but the adoption of HTA has been historically slow in Asia-Pacific. The scoring matrix manifests that most APAC countries have a formal HTA agency and are following a formal approach to implement HTA, but societal and patient perspectives need to be enforced via pertinent stakeholder engagement. While some HTA bodies of APAC region conduct independent reviews, others rely on findings from HTA reviews in other countries. Barring Australia which had already institutionalized HTA long ago, other countries like South Korea and Taiwan could be designated together as second most mature markets in terms of implementation of HTA.

CONCLUSION: In emerging markets, the adoption of HTA as more effective decision-making tool in healthcare is majorly restrained by lack of formal recognition and support from government bodies; pre-existing political, economic, and social policies; limited technical resources; and lack of real-world evidence. Co-collaboration among the developed and emerging countries via sharing good practices and expertise in a transparent manner will help to continue the maturation and adoption of HTA in Asia-Pacific.