Mónica García claims a model of evaluation "with more science, transparency, and participation" to incorporate health innovation

For Javier Padilla, the main challenge will be to provide the system with the necessary human and financial resources for the new model to work

10 minutes

fotonoticia 20260706133606 1920

fotonoticia 20260706133606 1920

Add DEMÓCRATA to Google

Ask FREN

Published

10 minutes

Most read

The Minister of Health, Mónica García, inaugurated this morning the presentation event of the new royal decree on health technology assessments, titled ‘Science, Value, and Decision in Health’. “It is one of the most relevant reforms in pharmaceutical policy in recent years and will allow the incorporation of innovation into the National Health System with criteria of greater scientific rigor, transparency, and participation,” she stressed.

García emphasized the work involved in implementing the measure, also acknowledging the eminently technical nature of the regulation. Furthermore, she highlighted its political significance in addressing a central issue for the healthcare system: how to decide which innovations should be incorporated into the public portfolio of services.

Innovation does not consist of incorporating everything new, but rather that which brings real value to people's health,” stated the minister, who argued that health technology assessment should serve to identify those therapies and products that truly improve patients' quality of life, while ensuring the equity and sustainability of the system.

One of the main advances of the royal decree, as she explained, is the separation between the scientific evaluation phase and the decision-making on financing and incorporation into the system. In her opinion, this differentiation will strengthen the independence of the processes, standardize valuation criteria, and provide greater predictability to all stakeholders involved, without becoming an obstacle to access to innovation.

The minister also highlighted the formal inclusion of patients and healthcare professionals in the evaluation process. According to her, this participation is not only a democratic principle but also an essential element for improving the quality of decisions, by combining scientific evidence with the experience of those who live daily with diseases and clinical practice.

Another focus of the speech was the adaptation of the Spanish system to the European Regulation on Health Technology Assessment. García argued that the new model will allow for the utilization of joint assessments carried out in the European Union, reduce administrative duplication, incorporate evidence from real clinical practice, and improve the early identification of emerging technologies.

Before handing over the floor to the technical managers of the project, the minister wanted to vindicate the spirit of the reform. Beyond the articles, she maintained, the royal decree reflects the will to consolidate a National Health System capable of continuing to incorporate the best biomedical innovation with clear rules, scientific rigor, transparency, and responsibility. "It is magnificent news for public health and, above all, for patients," she concluded.

Independent evaluation to improve decisions on drug financing

The new royal decree on health technology evaluation constitutes the missing piece to provide Spain with a stable architecture on which to build a system of access to innovation that is more transparent, participatory, and based on scientific evidence. That was the main conclusion of the dialogue held between César Hernández, general director of the Common Portfolio of Services of the National Health System and Pharmacy, and María Jesús Lamas, director of the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS).

Both officials reviewed the process of drafting the regulation and agreed that the publication of the royal decree represents much more than a procedural change. Hernández recalled that the regulation is part of a broader set of pharmaceutical policy reforms and stressed that, for the first time, Spain has a specific governance structure for the evaluation of health technologies. In his opinion, the objective is to move towards more agile decisions based on scientific knowledge, within a system of continuous improvement.

Lamas placed the reform in the context of the new European Regulation on Health Technology Assessment, whose purpose is to promote both innovation and more equitable access to medicines among member states. She explained that the new Spanish model will take advantage of the joint clinical evaluations carried out in Europe and will complete them with a national assessment of the added clinical value of each technology.

One of the main axes of the dialogue was the differentiation between scientific evaluation and decision-making. Hernández argued that evaluation should serve as the basis for financing decisions, but without replacing them, since these incorporate additional considerations related to the management of public resources. The key, he pointed out, is to ensure the coherence and transparency of the entire process.

For his part, Lamas insisted that independence constitutes one of the fundamental principles of the new system. In this regard, he explained that the institutional design of the royal decree, along with the participation of experts and conflict of interest management policies, seeks to ensure that evaluations respond exclusively to the available scientific evidence.

Both also agreed that utility will be the true criterion by which the success of the new model will be judged. For the director of the AEMPS, evaluations should not aim to become academic publications, but rather practical tools that allow the best possible decision to be made with the information available at any given time. Hernández added that the challenge now will be to develop this structure through methodological guides, governance mechanisms, and permanent collaboration between administrations, evaluators, professionals, and patients.

Reconciling access, sustainability, and the promotion of pharmaceutical innovation

The future Governance Council of the health technology assessment system must become the space where the needs of patients, professionals, administrations, and industry converge to ensure more agile access to innovation without compromising the sustainability of the National Health System. This was the main message of the first panel discussion, titled The new governance model: setting the course through dialogue.

Cristina González del Hierro, deputy director of the Service Portfolio of the National Health System, argued that improving access does not mean incorporating all technologies immediately, but rather ensuring the financing of those that have scientifically demonstrated real value. In the field of non-pharmacological technologies, she advocated for orienting innovation towards unmet healthcare needs and strengthening the planning and early detection of new technologies.

From the Federation of Scientific Medical Associations of Spain (FACME), Cristina Avendaño stressed that the participation of healthcare professionals will reinforce both the quality of the evaluations and the acceptance of funding decisions. Furthermore, she argued that the new model will allow research to be better oriented towards the real needs of the healthcare system and patients.

The Director General of Pharmacy of the Generalitat Valenciana, Elena Gras, insisted that access and sustainability must advance in a balanced way. She called for reports that facilitate homogeneous decisions throughout the territory, clear criteria for the re-evaluation of technologies, and greater predictability for both administrations and developers.

For her part, Lourdes Gil, head of the Pharmaceutical Technologies area of the Ministry of Industry and Tourism, considered that the new system will contribute to strengthening the industrial fabric by providing greater legal certainty, transparency, and stability to evaluation processes. In her opinion, these conditions will favor investment, innovation, and competitiveness in the Spanish pharmaceutical sector.

Representing patients, David Trigos, coordinator of the National Platform of the European Patients' Academy (EUPATI), advocated for the effective incorporation of patients' experience throughout the evaluation process through specific methodologies that allow generating useful evidence for decision-making. He also called for avoiding administrative duplications and improving coordination between evaluation, financing, and effective access.

Throughout the debate, participants agreed that the new Governance Council should provide shared strategic guidance, establish clear rules for evaluation and uncertainty management, and foster stable collaboration among administrations, professionals, patients, and industry. The consensus was that a more transparent, predictable, and participatory system will not only improve access to health innovations but also strengthen Spain's scientific and industrial capacity in a context of increasing international competition.

More agile, transparent, and useful evaluations

The implementation of the new health technology assessment system will require combining scientific rigor with agility, strengthening coordination among institutions, and providing sufficient resources to evaluation bodies. That was the message shared by the participants in the second round table, titled Development of the health technology assessment system: charting the path from practice.

Ana López de la Rica, deputy head of the Department of Human Use Medicines of the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices (AEMPS), defended that the new model will be based on an organized structure and strict deadlines to offer useful reports for decision-making. She explained that the adaptation of European joint clinical evaluations will reduce duplication, speed up procedures, and focus national reports on the added clinical value of each technology, always incorporating the perspective of patients and professionals.

For her part, Blanca Novella, president of the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies, considered that the royal decree places evaluation "at the center" of decision-making, although she warned that the real challenge will be to integrate the so-called non-clinical domains, such as organizational, social, or budgetary impact, within the planned deadlines. To this end, she advocated for structured methodologies that combine quantitative and qualitative evidence.

From the Advisory Committee on Pharmaceutical Provision, Ana Ortega advocated for systematizing evaluations through methodological guides that allow distinguishing when it is necessary to carry out complete economic analyses and when simpler procedures are sufficient. She also proposed provisional financing mechanisms for innovations with clearly demonstrated clinical benefit.

The president of the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy, Cecilia Martínez, underlined the need to accelerate access when the evidence is solid and concentrate evaluation efforts on technologies that present greater uncertainty. She also highlighted that the new system formalizes the incorporation of aspects that were already implicitly taken into account, such as patients' quality of life or organizational impact.

Finally, Pilar Pinilla, director of methods, research, and economic evaluation at the British NICE, defended that evaluations must be useful, robust, and, above all, flexible, adapting to the life cycle of each technology and assuming that decisions will continue to be made in a context of uncertainty.

In conclusion, the participants agreed that the success of the new model will depend on developing clear methodological guidelines, meeting demanding deadlines without sacrificing scientific rigor, and applying evaluations proportionate to each case. They also called for effectively incorporating the patient and professional perspective, developing new non-clinical domains with homogeneous criteria, and providing the system with the necessary resources to make the reform a reality during the coming year.

Close collaboration

The Secretary of State for Industry, Jordi García Brustenga, highlighted in his conclusion the close collaboration between the Ministries of Industry and Health in the development of pharmaceutical policy and advocated for a shared vision to strengthen the sector in Spain. The joint presence of both departments "reflects the growing degree of institutional coordination in an increasingly strategic area."

García Brustenga considered that the pharmaceutical industry represents a "key" sector due to its capacity to generate innovation, qualified employment, and added value, which is why he advocated for promoting policies that favor both patient access to medicines and industrial competitiveness.

He also highlighted initiatives such as the Profarma program and argued that collaboration between administrations, companies, and the healthcare system will be essential to face the challenges of innovation and consolidate the leadership of the Spanish pharmaceutical sector.

More resources

The Secretary of State for Health, Javier Padilla, defended in his conclusion the new royal decree on health technology assessment as a step to reinforce a system "more based on science, the best available knowledge, and transparency," although he stressed that the evaluation of medicines in Spain does not begin with this regulation, but rather relies on the work developed over years by professionals and institutions.

In addition, he thanked the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Medical Devices, the General Directorate of Portfolio and Pharmacy, the Ministry of Science, and the Health Technology Assessment Network for their work, and highlighted the collaboration between different ministries as a key element to address the growing complexity of pharmaceutical policy.

The Secretary of State rejected the criticisms that question that the evaluation reports are not binding for funding decisions. In his opinion, transferring that responsibility exclusively to the evaluators would be a mistake, since the final decision must incorporate other elements besides scientific evidence. In this regard, he defended that the decree more clearly separates the evaluation and decision-making phases, delimits the competencies of each actor, and expands the participation of new agents.

Padilla pointed out that the main challenge will be to provide the system with the necessary human and financial resources for the new model to work. In this regard, he assured that the reform will require stable professionals, specialized training, and sufficient funding to consolidate evaluation capabilities and strengthen collaboration with universities and other institutions.

Finally, he expressed his confidence that during the next year the practical application of the new framework can begin through the development of methodological guides, and maintained that the evolution of the debate on this reform shows that the health system is advancing.

 

More key points, information and questions with FREN

AI-GENERATED CONTENT

What is the current parliamentary status of the royal decree on health technology assessment and what are the next steps for its full implementation?

In the official sources consulted, there is no recent “Royal Decree on health technology assessment” currently under parliamentary processing in the current XV Legislature. The specific regulatory framework in force remains essentially the Royal Decree 207/2010, on supervised use of techniques and technologies, and the Order SSI/1833/2013, which regulates the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies and SNS Benefits. Since it is an “ordinary” royal decree (not a royal decree-law), it does not have a validation phase nor is it processed as a bill in Congress or Senate. Therefore, the next steps for a more complete application depend on administrative developments (ministerial orders, agreements of the Interterritorial Council, evaluation plans and programming), not on a pending parliamentary procedure on a new decree.

1. What regulation is currently associated with “health technology assessment”?

The closest reference in the Spanish legal system to what is colloquially called “royal decree on health technology assessment” is:

– The Royal Decree 207/2010, of February 26, which establishes the conditions for the supervised use of health techniques, technologies, and procedures, developing Law 16/2003 regarding the incorporation of new techniques or technologies into the SNS service portfolio. Its text is available in the BOE: Royal Decree 207/2010.

– The Order SSI/1833/2013, of October 2, which creates and regulates the Council of the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies and SNS Benefits, known as RedETS, which coordinates the network work of the regional agencies and the Carlos III Health Institute. Its official publication is at: Order SSI/1833/2013.

Both regulations are issued in development of Law 16/2003, on cohesion and quality of the SNS, especially its articles on assessment and updating of the service portfolio.

2. Parliamentary status: why there is no procedure in the Cortes

Neither Royal Decree 207/2010 nor Order SSI/1833/2013 are linked to any open parliamentary procedure in the XV Legislature. This is consistent with their nature:

– The Royal Decree 207/2010 is a regulatory provision approved by the Council of Ministers and published in the BOE on March 16, 2010. It is not a royal decree-law, so: it is not subject to validation in Congress nor processed as a bill.

– The Order SSI/1833/2013 is a ministerial order (a regulation of lower rank than a royal decree), which also does not go through Parliament.

In the parliamentary information analyzed, there is no new royal decree or royal decree-law in the current legislature specifically aimed at “health technology assessment” that is in validation phase, processing as a bill, or modification in the Cortes. No further information is available in the sources consulted indicating a new regulatory initiative under parliamentary processing on this matter.

3. What does this imply for its practical application?

Since the key regulations are already in force, the “next steps” are not parliamentary but administrative deployment and updating:

3.1. Application of Royal Decree 207/2010

RD 207/2010 regulates supervised use as a mechanism to generate evidence on safety, efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency of a technique or technology before deciding its inclusion in the service portfolio. For full application, the following must occur:

Proposals for supervised use by the Ministry of Health or autonomous communities, channeled through the Commission of Benefits, Assurance, and Financing. – Agreements of the SNS Interterritorial Council endorsing those supervised uses and defining participating centers and conditions. – Orders from the Ministry of Health authorizing each specific supervised use, as provided by the royal decree itself. – Preparation of technical reports and economic memoranda that, once supervised use is completed, serve as the basis for the decision on updating the service portfolio.

3.2. Operation of RedETS (Order SSI/1833/2013)

Order SSI/1833/2013 establishes the Council of the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies and SNS Benefits, which coordinates the network work of the regional agencies and the Carlos III Health Institute. Its full application depends on:

– Approval of annual evaluation plans for prioritized technologies and benefits for the SNS. – Effective preparation of evaluation reports by the agencies and their submission to decision-making bodies (Commission of Benefits, Directorate General of Basic Portfolio, Interterritorial Council). – Systematic use of those reports in decisions on inclusion, exclusion, or modification of use conditions of SNS benefits.

4. What could come in the future?

In the medium term, the Government may promote a new royal decree to adapt the Spanish health technology assessment system to European changes and the SNS’s own development (redefinition of RedETS, coordination with drug evaluation, digitization of processes, etc.). However, in the official documentation consulted, there is currently no draft or preliminary royal decree specifically on health technology assessment under processing.

In summary: today the system relies on already effective regulations (Law 16/2003, RD 1030/2006, RD 207/2010, and Order SSI/1833/2013), without a “new” royal decree in parliamentary processing, and the key to its full application lies in how the Ministry of Health and autonomous communities prioritize, agree, and execute the specific evaluation and service portfolio updating processes.

What are the legal competencies of the Minister of Health regarding the incorporation of health technologies into the National Health System?

The Minister of Health is the state authority responsible for defining and proposing the common service portfolio of the National Health System (SNS), organizing the evaluation of new health technologies, and approving, through regulations, their inclusion, exclusion, or modification in said portfolio. These functions are exercised through the Ministry and its management bodies, based on Law 16/2003 on cohesion and quality of the SNS and Royal Decree 1030/2006, which regulates in detail the portfolio and its updating procedure. The incorporation of techniques, technologies, procedures, medicines, and health products requires prior evaluation coordinated by the Ministry and agreement of the SNS Interterritorial Council, the basic cohesion body between the State and autonomous communities. All this is framed within the general regime of the General State Administration established by Law 40/2015 on the Legal Regime of the Public Sector.

1. Common service portfolio and benefits catalog

Law 16/2003 defines the SNS benefits catalog as the set of preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, and rehabilitative services directed at citizens. This law establishes that equity and quality of the system require a “common core of action” in the form of a basic and fixed portfolio, and that new benefits must be evaluated based on scientific evidence and their organizational and economic impact (Law 16/2003).

The key regulatory development is Royal Decree 1030/2006, which “establishes the common service portfolio of the National Health System and the procedure for its updating” (Royal Decree 1030/2006). This royal decree:

• Defines the SNS common service portfolio as the set of techniques, technologies, or procedures through which health benefits are made effective.
• Sets as objectives “to establish the content of the common service portfolio” and “to set the bases of the procedure for updating the common service portfolio of the National Health System”.
• Indicates that the portfolio included in the royal decree has the “prior agreement of the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System,” which implies that the minister proposes changes to the Council of Ministers only after negotiation and agreement with the autonomous communities in said body.

2. Evaluation and incorporation of health technologies

Law 16/2003 specifically foresees that “new techniques, technologies, or procedures” be subjected to evaluation by the Ministry of Health, establishing in its article 21 that the portfolio updating will be developed by regulation and listing the requirements to be verified in such evaluation, coordinated by the Ministry (Law 16/2003).

Royal Decree 1030/2006 specifies these competencies of the minister/Ministry:

• For the definition and updating of the portfolio, “therapeutic safety, efficacy, efficiency, effectiveness, and utility” of techniques, technologies, and procedures will be taken into account, as well as their alternatives, care for risk groups, social needs, and economic and organizational impact.
• Before including a technique or technology that uses medicines, health products, or dietetics, it is essential that: medicines are authorized and used according to their technical sheet, and health products have CE marking for the corresponding indication.

Based on this framework, the minister exercises specific regulatory powers by approving ministerial orders that modify the annexes of RD 1030/2006 to adapt the portfolio to scientific evidence and innovation. Recent examples are Order SND/606/2024, which creates an Advisory Committee for the genetics portfolio and modifies annexes I, II, III, VI, and VII, or Order SND/454/2025, which again updates annexes I, II, III, and VI.

Additionally, Order SCO/3422/2007 develops the updating procedure of the RD 1030/2006 portfolio, and Order SSI/1356/2015 regulates monitoring studies of techniques, technologies, and procedures, tools that the Ministry promotes to make decisions on incorporation or disinvestment. Order SCB/45/2019 even establishes the specific procedure for inclusion, alteration, and exclusion of orthoprosthetic products from the catalog.

In parallel, the minister coordinates the evaluation network through Order SSI/1833/2013, which creates and regulates the Council of the Spanish Network of Health Technology Assessment Agencies and SNS Benefits, a key technical instrument to support decisions on new technologies.

3. Coordination with autonomous communities

In the preamble of Law 16/2003 itself, it is indicated that “the basic cohesion body is the Interterritorial Council of the National Health System,” which is provided with mechanisms to make joint decisions between the State and autonomous communities on, among other matters, the development and updating of the portfolio and supervised use of technologies (Law 16/2003).

RD 1030/2006 emphasizes that the service portfolio is approved with the “prior agreement” of the Interterritorial Council, which practically limits the minister’s unilateral capacity and makes her decisions the result of a multilateral cooperation process. Additionally, regulations such as Royal Decree 207/2010, on supervised use of techniques, technologies, and procedures, articulate how controlled use of emerging technologies can be authorized in a coordinated manner before their possible full incorporation into the portfolio.

Finally, Law 40/2015 establishes the general framework of collegiate cooperation bodies between Administrations and the role of ministers as superior bodies of the General State Administration (Law 40/2015). This framework underpins the role of the Minister of Health as the political responsible for state decisions and as a central figure in interterritorial negotiation on health technologies.

What requirements must health technologies meet to be incorporated into the public service portfolio according to current legislation?

Health technologies are incorporated into the common service portfolio of the National Health System (SNS) only if they pass a double filter: very strict material requirements of efficacy, safety, and efficiency, and a formal evaluation and decision procedure within the Ministry of Health and the Interterritorial Council. The basic framework is in Law 16/2003 and is developed in Royal Decree 1030/2006 and Order SCO/3422/2007, complemented by regulations on supervised use and monitoring. Based on these regulations, new techniques, technologies, or procedures must demonstrate added value compared to existing alternatives and an economically manageable impact, as well as go through a circuit of technical evaluation, prioritization, and political decision. Below is a summary of the main requirements and procedure according to current legislation.

Basic legal framework

Law 16/2003, on cohesion and quality of the SNS (Law 16/2003), defines that benefits are made effective through “techniques, technologies, and procedures” that integrate the service portfolio; it establishes that the portfolio is approved by royal decree and that new techniques and technologies will undergo prior evaluation before their incorporation and public funding, allowing their supervised use with limited and protocolized character. This regulatory development is specified in Royal Decree 1030/2006 (Royal Decree 1030/2006) and its amendments, such as Order SCB/480/2019 (Order SCB/480/2019), Order SND/606/2024 (Order SND/606/2024), or Order SND/454/2025 (Order SND/454/2025), which update its annexes. In parallel, Royal Decree-law 16/2012 (Royal Decree-law 16/2012) distinguishes between basic common portfolio, supplementary, and accessory services, and Royal Decree 1506/2012 (Royal Decree 1506/2012) regulates the supplementary common orthoprosthetic service portfolio.

Material requirements for health technologies

General criteria (Royal Decree 1030/2006, art. 5)

To be included in the common portfolio, techniques, technologies, or procedures must simultaneously meet, according to article 5 of Royal Decree 1030/2006:

a) Clinical utility: effectively contribute to prevention, diagnosis, or treatment of diseases, improvement of life expectancy, self-sufficiency, or reduction of pain and suffering.
b) Added value: provide a demonstrated improvement in safety, efficacy, effectiveness, efficiency, or utility compared to currently provided alternatives.
c) Regulatory compliance: when products are required, these must be authorized: authorized medicines used according to their technical sheet; health products with CE marking and requirements of Royal Decree 414/1996; dietetic products with favorable resolution according to their specific regulation; and any other product subject to its sectoral regulation.

The same article 5 expressly excludes from the portfolio those techniques or procedures whose efficacy is not sufficiently proven, that are in research phase (except compassionate use), that are unrelated to disease, accident, or malformation, or that pursue merely leisure, comfort, or aesthetic purposes.

Evaluation of relevance, impact, and risk (arts. 7 and 8 RD 1030/2006)

Article 7 of Royal Decree 1030/2006 requires that relevant new techniques and technologies be evaluated by the Ministry of Health, through the health technology assessment agency of the Carlos III Health Institute (regulated by Royal Decree 375/2001 and Royal Decree 590/2005), in collaboration with evaluation bodies of the autonomous communities. This evaluation must analyze cost, efficacy, efficiency, effectiveness, safety, and health utility, possibly relying on evaluation reports, registries, expert opinion, or supervised uses. Additionally, the relevance of the technology is considered if, among others, it involves:

– A substantially novel contribution (prevention, diagnosis, therapeutics, rehabilitation, life expectancy, pain elimination).
– New indications of existing equipment or products.
– Need for new specific equipment or significant organizational changes.
– Impact on broad population sectors or risk groups.
Significant economic impact on the SNS.
– Relevant risks for users, professionals, or the environment.

When the budgetary impact is high, the file is sent to the interministerial commission with budgetary significance, and its report is forwarded to the Fiscal and Financial Policy Council, according to article 8 of Royal Decree 1030/2006.

Incorporation and updating procedure

Initiative, prioritization, and evaluation (Order SCO/3422/2007)

Order SCO/3422/2007 (Order SCO/3422/2007) develops the updating procedure of the portfolio. Proposals may come from the Ministry or autonomous communities; the Subdirectorate General of Service Portfolio and New Technologies verifies the documentation and submits the file to the Commission of Benefits, Assurance, and Financing, a key body in selection and prioritization. This Commission applies additional criteria such as: severity and frequency of the process, existence of alternatives, uncertainty about safety or efficiency, benefits for the patient (lower risk, discomfort, time), benefits for professional practice, and benefits for the system (lower resources or cost at equal quality). Evaluation reports must include, besides clinical and economic data, the ethical, legal, social, and organizational repercussions.

Final decision and supervised use

Once evaluation is completed, the Commission makes a proposal for inclusion, exclusion, or modification of use conditions; the final decision corresponds to the Ministry of Health, subject to agreement of the SNS Interterritorial Council, by ministerial order updating the annexes of Royal Decree 1030/2006. If the available evidence is insufficient for a definitive decision, supervised use may be resorted to according to Order SCO/3422/2007 and Royal Decree 207/2010 (Royal Decree 207/2010), which sets conditions for supervised use and its monitoring. Order SSI/1356/2015 (Order SSI/1356/2015) and the Resolution of September 3, 2015 (Resolution 3‑9‑2015) regulate and detail monitoring studies of techniques and technologies under this regime.

Equity and territorial cohesion

Updating orders, such as Order SSI/2065/2014 (Order SSI/2065/2014), Order SAS/1466/2010 (Order SAS/1466/2010), Order SPI/573/2011 (Order SPI/573/2011), Order SSI/1640/2012 (Order SSI/1640/2012) or Order SCB/45/2019 (Order SCB/480/2019) show how these criteria translate into concrete decisions (cancer screenings, implants, ocular readers, micropigmentation, orthoprostheses…). Additionally, Order SSI/1833/2013 creates the Council of the Spanish Network of Assessment Agencies (Order SSI/1833/2013), reinforcing coordinated evaluation that promotes equity and cohesion of the SNS.

Play

Test your knowledge with FREN!

How much do you know about this topic? Answer the following 3 questions.

What is one of the main advances of the new royal decree on health technology assessment presented by Mónica García?

Question 1 of 3

What role will patients and healthcare professionals have in the new health technology assessment system?

Question 2 of 3

To which European regulation is the new Spanish health technology assessment model adapted?

Question 3 of 3

Hola, soy Fren. ¿Cómo te ayudo?