A model of cost-outcome analysis for assistive technology

Disability and Rehabilitation

Volumn 20, Issue 1, 1998, Pages 1-24

  Andrich, Renzo ^a   Ferrario, Massimo ^a   Moi, Matteo ^a  

^a IRCCS FONDAZIONE DON CARLO GNOCCHI   (Italy)

Author keywords

Assistive technology; Cost outcome analysis; Quality of life; Technology assessment

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; DISABLED PERSON; FEMALE; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; MALE; MODEL; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUALITY OF LIFE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT; TECHNICAL AID; TECHNOLOGY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 0031964564     PISSN: 09638288     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/09638289809166850     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Coates, J. Some methods and techniques for comprehensive impact assessments. Technological Fore casting and Social Change 1974; 6: 341-357.
2. O'Brien D M, Marchand D A. Politics, technology and technology assessment. In O'Brien DM & Marchand DA (eds) The Politics of Technology Assessment: Institutions, processes, and policy disputes. Lexington: Health and Company, 1982.
3. Office of Technology Assessment. U.S. Congress Strategies for Medical Technology Assessment. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.
4. Goodman C. Health care technology assessment: Basic methodology training package. EC COMETT project ASSESS (University-Industry Partnership in the Training for Health Care Technology Assessment). Helsinki: Helsinki University of Technology, Institute for Biomedical Engineering 1992.
5. Drummond M F, Stoddart G L, Torrance G W. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications, 1989.
6. Luce B R, Elixhauser A. Standards for Socioeconomic Evaluation of Health Care Products and Services. Vienna: Springer-Verlag, 1990.
7. Sugden R, Williams A. The Principles of Practical Cost-Benefit Analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988.
8. Wyatt J R, Niparko J K, Rothman M L, De Lissovoy G. Cost effectiveness of the multichannel cochlear implant. The American Journal of Otology 1995; 16: 52-62.
9. Persson J, Brodin H. Legal and macrosconomic factors impacting rehabilitation technology availability. Deliverable 2, Chapter 1 : Existing socio-economic models. European Commission DGXTIDE/HEART Project, 1993.
10. Alastuey J, Kerdraon M, Persson J, Brodin H, Petäkosky-Hult T. Legal and macroeconomic factors impacting rehabilitation technology availability. Deliverable 2, Chapter 2 : Assessment and refinement of existing socio-economic models. European Commission DGXTIDE/HEART Project, 1994.
11. Lorentsen 0, Hem KG. Critical factors and general outcomes of assistire technology. Deliverable 1, European Commission TIDE/ CERTAIN Project, 1995.
12. Persson J, Bordin H. Prototype tool for assistive technology cost and utility evaluation. Deliverable 2, European Commission TIDE/ CERTAIN Project, 1995.
13. Andrich R, Ferrario M. Cost outcome analysis for assistive technology: case studies. Deliverable 3, European Commission TIDE/CERTAIN Project, 1996.
14. Van Beekum T, Oortwijn W. Validation of the CERTAIN tool. Deliverable 4, European Commission TIDE/CERTAIN Project, 1995.
15. De Witte L, Knops H, Pyfers L, Roben P, Johnson I, Andrich R, Parker M, Forsberg S. European Sen-ice Systems in Rehabilitation Technology. European Commission DGXTIDE/HEART Project, 1994.
16. DeRuyter F. Evaluating outcomes in assistive technology: do we understand the commitment? Assistive Technology 1995; 7: 3-16.
17. FIM-Functional Independence Measure. Copyright 1992 The Research Foundation of the State University of New York at Buffalo.
18. Marino RJ, Cohen ME. Measuring functional outcomes after rehabilitation for spinal cord injury. Assessing the functional independence measure. VA Rehabilitation R&D progress reports 1996; 68.
19. Sintonen H, Pekurinen M. A fifteen-dimensional measure of healthrelated quality of life (15D) and its application. In: Walker S R & Rosser R M. Quality of Life Assessment: Key issues in the 90s. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic 1993; 185-195.
20. The EuroQol Group. EuroQol: a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. Health Policy 1990; 16: 199-208.
21. Torrance G W, Boyle M H, Horwood S P. Index of health-related quality of life. Operation Research 1982; 6.
22. Walker S R, Rosser R M. McMaster health classification system. In: Walker S R & Rosser R M. Quality of Life Assessment. Key issues in the 90s. Dordrecht; Kluwer Academic, 1993.