Objectives: The practical significance of health technology assessment (HTA) in policy decisions or clinical practice has been challenged. Possibly, problem definitions underlying HTA do not concur sufficiently with the problem definitions held by policy makers or clinicians. We performed an in-depth case study on mebeverine, a drug prescribed to patients with irritable bowel syndrome, to explore this hypothesis.
Methods: The theoretical framework was provided by the theory of argumentative policy analysis. We analyzed documents and held semistructured interviews to collect data. We reconstructed interpretative frames to analyze actors' argumentation.
Results: The funding and usage problems relating to mebeverine were ill-structured. Actors disagreed on the information needed and the norms at stake. As a result, the problem definition shifted, and the resulting problem definitions failed to correspond with the problems perceived by the target populations.
Conclusions: To ensure that future studies on healthcare problems are useful, it is imperative that policy makers take the problem definitions of potential users into account.