Thomas G. Poder
1,2* 
, Marc Rhainds
3 , Christian A. Bellemare
4 , Simon Deblois
5 , Imane Hammana
5 , Catherine Safianyk
6 , Sylvie St-Jacques
6 , Pierre Dagenais
7,8 1 Department of Management, Evaluation and Health Policy, School of Public Health, University of Montreal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
2 Centre de Recherche de l’Institut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de Montréal, CIUSSS de l’Est de l’Île de Montréal, Montréal, QC, Canada.
3 HTA Unit, CHU de Québec – Université Laval, Québec, QC, Canada.
4 Department of Multidisciplinary Services, Clinical Quality Division, CIUSSS de l’Estrie-CHUS, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
5 HTA Unit, CHUM, Montréal, QC, Canada.
6 HTA Unit, CIUSSS de la CapitaleNationale, Québec, QC, Canada.
7 HTA Unit, CIUSSS de l’Estrie – CHUS, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
8 Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Science, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Abstract
This study evaluated the use of Cochrane systematic reviews (CSRs) by Quebec’s local health technology assessment (HTA) units to promote efficiency in hospital decision-making. An online survey was conducted to examine: Characteristics of the HTA units; Knowledge about works and services from the Cochrane Collaboration; Level of satisfaction about the use of CSRs; Facilitating factors and barriers to the implementation of CSRs evidence in a local context; Suggestions to improve the use of CSRs. Data accuracy was checked by 2 independent evaluators. Ten HTA units participated. From their implementation a total of 321 HTA reports were published (49.8% included a SR). Works and services provided by the Cochrane collaboration were very well-known and HTA units were highly satisfied with CSRs (80%-100%). As regards to applicability in HTA and use of CSRs, major strengths were as follow: Useful as resource for search terms and background material; May reduce the workload (eg, brief review instead of full SR); Use to update a current review. Major weaknesses were: Limited use since no CSRs were available for many HTA projects; Difficulty to apply findings to local context; Focused only on efficacy and innocuity; Cannot be used as a substitute to a full HTA report. This study provided a unique context of assessment with a familiar group of producers, users and disseminators of CSRs in hospital setting. Since they generally used other articles from the literature or produce an original SR in complement with CSRs, this led to suggestions to improve their use of CSRs. However, the main limit for the use of CRS in local HTA will remain its lack of contextualisation. As such, this study reinforces the need to consider the notion of complementarity of experimental data informing us about causality and contextual data, allowing decision-making adapted to local issues.