Different methods for ethical analysis in health technology assessment: An empirical study

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 27, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 305-312

  Saarni, Samuli I ^a,b   Braunack Mayer, Annette ^c   Hofmann, Bjørn ^d,e,f   Van Der Wilt, Gert Jan ^g  

^a NATIONAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HELSINKI   (Finland)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ADELAIDE   (Australia)

^d NORWEGIAN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY   (Norway)

^e Norwegian Knowledge Center for the Health Services   (Norway)

^f UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

^g RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Axiology; Casuistry; Ethics; EUnetHTA; Health technology assessment; Principlism

Indexed keywords

AXIOLOGY; CASUISTRY; ETHICS; EUNETHTA; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; PRINCIPLISM;

HEALTH;

PHILOSOPHICAL ASPECTS;

ARTICLE; BARIATRIC SURGERY; CASUISTRY; EUNETHTA MODEL; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; MEDICAL ETHICS; MODEL;

BARIATRIC SURGERY; CASUISTRY; ETHICAL ANALYSIS; FINANCING, GOVERNMENT; HUMANS; MORALS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84858993969     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462311000444     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Beauchamp T, Childress J. Principles of biomedical ethics. 6th Edition (1 st ed. 1979). New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.
2. Braunack-Mayer AJ. Ethics and health technology assessment: Handmaiden and/or critic? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:307-312. (Pubitemid 44469436)
3. Brennan J. The open-texture of moral concepts. London: Macmillan; 1977.
4. Buchwald H, Avidor Y, Braunwald E, et al. Bariatric surgery: A systematic review andmeta-analysis. JAMA. 2004;292:1724-1737. (Pubitemid 39346675)
5. Colquitt JL, Picot J, Loveman E, Clegg AJ. Surgery for obesity. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009:CD003641.
6. Droste S, Gerhardus A, Kollek R. Methoden zur Erfassung ethischer Aspekte und gesellschaftlicher Wertvorstellungen in Kurz-HTA-Berichten - eine internationale Bestandsaufnahme. [Methods for the assessment of ethical aspects and moral concepts in society in health technology assessment reports - an international survey]. Schriftenreihe HTA des DIMDI vol. 9. Köln; 2003.
7. Heitman E. Ethical issues in technology assessment. Conceptual categories and procedural considerations. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1998;14:544-566. (Pubitemid 28433898)
8. Hofmann B. Toward a procedure for integrating moral issues in health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005;21:312-318. (Pubitemid 41099211)
9. Hofmann B. On value-judgments and ethics in health technology assessment. Poiesis Prax. 2005;3:277-295. (Pubitemid 43045812)
10. Hofmann B. Etikk i vurdering av helsetiltak. Utvikling av en metode for å synliggjøre etiske utfordringer ved vurdering av helsetiltak. [In Norwegian with an English summary: Ethics in the assessment of health technology]. Oslo: Norwegian Knowledge Center for the Health Services; 2008.
11. Hofmann B. Stuck in the middle: The many moral challenges with bariatric surgery. Am J Bioeth. 2010;10:3-11.
12. Hofmann BM. Why ethics should be part of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24:423-429.
13. Ikonen T, Anttila H, Gylling H, et al. Sairaalloisen lihavuuden leikkaushoito. [Surgical treatment of morbid obesity. In Finnish]. Helsinki: National Institute for Health and Welfare; 2009.
14. Jonsen AR. Casuistry as methodology in clinical ethics. Theor Med. 1991;12:295-307.
15. Lampe K, Mäkelä M, eds. HTA Core Model for medical and surgical interventions 1.0R: http://www.eunethta.net/upload/WP4/Final%20Deliverables/ HTA%20Core%20Model%20for%20Medical%20and%20Surgical%20Interventions%201%200r. pdf 2008 (accessed August 29, 2011).
16. Lampe K, Mäkelä M, Garrido MV, et al. The HTA core model: A novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(Suppl 2):9-20.
17. Lehoux P, Tailliez S, Denis JL, Hivon M. Redefining health technology assessment in Canada: Diversification of products and contextualization of findings. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:325-336. (Pubitemid 39079568)
18. Mitka M. Surgery for obesity: Demand soars amid scientific, ethical questions. JAMA. 2003;289:1761-1762. (Pubitemid 37430236)
19. Office of Technology Assessment. Development of medical technology: Opportunities for assessment. Washington, DC: Office of Technology Assessment; 1976.
20. Puhl RM, Heuer CA. The stigma of obesity: A review and update. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2009;17:941-964.
21. Raper SE, Sarwer DB. Informed consent issues in the conduct of bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2008;4:60-68.
22. Saarni SI, Anttila H, Saarni SE, et al. Ethical issues of bariatric surgery - a health technology assessment. Obes Surg. 2011 [Epub ahead of print].
23. Saarni SI, Hofmann B, Lampe K, et al. Ethical analysis to improve decision-making on health technologies. Bull World Health Organ. 2008;86:617-623.
24. ten Have H. Ethical perspectives on health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004;20:71-76.
25. Van der Wilt GJ, Reuzel R, Banta HD. The ethics of assessing health technologies. Theor Med Bioeth. 2000;21:103-115. (Pubitemid 30449407)