New technologies and surgical innovation: Five years of a Local Health Technology Assessment Program in a Surgical Department

Surgical Innovation

Volumn 19, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 187-199

  Poulin, Paule ^a   Austen, Lea ^a   Kortbeek, John B ^a   Lafrenière, René ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

clinical engagement; evidence based decision making; HTA into practice; safety and clinical effectiveness; supporting innovation

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CLINICAL RESEARCH; HEALTH PROGRAM; HUMAN; MEDICAL AUDIT; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SURGICAL WARD;

ALBERTA; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; SURGERY DEPARTMENT, HOSPITAL; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84861994891     PISSN: 15533506     EISSN: 15533514     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1553350611421916     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Danjoux NM, Martin DK, Lehoux PN, et al. Adoption of an innovation to repair aortic aneurysms at a Canadian hospital: a qualitative case study and evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007;7:182.
2. Lomas J, Culyer T, McCutcheon C, Law S, Tetroe J. Conceptualizing and Combining Evidence for Health System Guidance. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation, Ottawa, 2005.
3. Mitton C, McGregor J, Conroy M, Waddell C. Making choices in healthcare: the reality of scarcity. Hosp Q. 2002;6:48-54.
4. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. Health technology assessment. http://www.cadth.ca/en/products/health-technologyassessment/health- technology-assessments. Accessed March24, 2011.
5. Granados A. Health technology assessment and clinical decision making: which is the best evidence? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1999;15:585-592. (Pubitemid 29466189)
6. Menon D, Stafinski T. Health technology assessment in Canada: 20 years strong? Value Health. 2009;12(suppl 2):S14-S19.
7. Lee RC, Marshall D, Waddell C, Hailey D, Juzwishin D. Health technology assessment, research, and implementation within a health region in Alberta, Canada. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003;19:513-520. (Pubitemid 38649119)
8. Hailey DM. Health technology assessment in Canada: diversity and evolution. Med J Aust. 2007;187:286-288.
9. Gagnon MP, Sanchez E, Pons JM. Integration of health technology assessment recommendations into organizational and clinical practice: a case study in Catalonia. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:169-176.
10. Lomas J. Improving Research Dissemination and Uptake in the Health Sector: Beyond the Sound of One Hand Clapping (Policy Commentary C97-1). Hamilton, Ontario, Canada: McMaster University Centre for Health Economics Policy and Policy Analysis; 1997.
11. Scott CM, Hofmeyer AT. Acknowledging complexity: critically analyzing context to understand interdisciplinary research. J Interprof Care. 2007;21:491-501. (Pubitemid 47487863)
12. Barkun JS, Aronson JK, Feldman LS, et al. Evaluation and stages of surgical innovations. Lancet. 2009;374:1089-1096.
13. Ergina PL, Cook JA, Blazeby JM, et al. Challenges in evaluating surgical innovation. Lancet. 2009;374:1097-1104.
14. Grol R, Wensing M. What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. Med J Aust. 2004;180:S57.
15. Kent B, Hutchinson AM, Fineout Overholt E. Getting evidence into practice: understanding knowledge translation to achieve practice change. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2009;6:183-185.
16. Brehaut J, Juzwishin D. Bridging the Gap: The Use of Research Evidence in Policy Development. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research; 2005.
17. Poulin P, Donnon T, Oddone Paolucci E, et al. What is health technology assessment (HTA)? An interactive HTA education program for health care practitioners in a local setting. Presentation at: Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi) 2006: Dissemination and Clinician Uptake of HTA; July 3-5, 2006; Adelaide, Australia.
18. Poulin P, Donnon T, Oddone Paolucci E, et al. Interactive HTA education program for health care practitioners in local setting. Presentation at: Canadian Agencies for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) Invitational Symposium 2006: From Evidence to Policy to Practice; April 3-5, 2006, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
19. Juzwishin D. Framework for Regional Health Authorities to Make Optimal Use of Health Technology Assessment. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research; 2000.
20. Poulin P, Scott CM, Gall N, et al. Adapting a local health technology decision support program to various departments within a health region. Presentation at: CADTH Invitational Symposium 2007 - Informing Policy, Influencing Practice, Improving Health; April 22-24, 2007; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
21. Poulin P, Waddell C, Dixon E, et al. Developing criteria and decision-making processes for prioritization of health technologies at the local level. Presentation at: Canadian Agencies for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) Invitational Symposium 2007 - Informing Policy, Influencing Practice, Improving Health; April 22-24, 2007; Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
22. Noorani HZ, Husereau DR, Boudreau R, Skidmore B. Priority setting for health technology assessments: a systematic review of current practical approaches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23:310-315. (Pubitemid 46956887)
23. von Below GC, Boer A, Conde-Olasagasti JL, et al. Health technology assessment in policy and practice: Working Group 6 report. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2002;18:447-455. (Pubitemid 34533754)
24. Ehlers L, Vestergaard M, Kidholm K, et al. Doing minihealth technology assessments in hospitals: a new concept of decision support in health care? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:295-301. (Pubitemid 44469434)
25. Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2006;4:14.
26. Goetghebeur MM, Wagner M, Khoury H, Rindress D, Grégoire JP, Deal C. Combining multicriteria decision analysis, ethics and health technology assessment: applying the EVIDEM decision-making framework to growth hormone for Turner syndrome patients. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2010;8:4.
27. McGregor M. Impact of TAU reports (Report No. 33). Montreal, Quebec, Canada: McGill University Health Centre Technology Assessment Unit; 2008.
28. Lehoux P, Williams-Jones B, Miller F, Urbach D, Tailliez S. What leads to better health care innovation? Arguments for an integrated policy-oriented research agenda. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2008;13:251-254.
29. Favaretti C, Cicchetti A, Guarrera G, Marchetti M, Ricciardi W. Health technology assessment in Italy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:127-133.
30. Kidholm K, Ehlers L, Korsbek L, Kjaerby R, Beck M. Assessment of the quality of mini-HTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:42-48.
31. Sharma B, Danjoux NM, Harnish JL, Urbach DR. How are decisions to introduce new surgical technologies made? Advanced laparoscopic surgery at a Canadian community hospital: a qualitative case study and evaluation. Surg Innov. 2006;13:250-256. (Pubitemid 44942371)
32. Stafinski T, McCabe CJ, Menon D. Funding the unfundable: mechanisms for managing uncertainty in decisions on the introduction of new and innovative technologies into healthcare systems. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:113-142.
33. Briggs A, Ritchie K, Fenwick E, Chalkidou K, Littlejohns P. Access with evidence development in the UK: past experience, current initiatives and future potential. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:163-170.
34. Hutton J, Trueman P, Henshall C. Coverage with evidence development: an examination of conceptual and policy issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2007;23: 425-432. (Pubitemid 47586920)
35. Trueman P, Grainger DL, Downs KE. Coverage with evidence development: applications and issues. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26:79-85.
36. Mohr PE, Tunis SR. Access with evidence development: the US experience. Pharmacoeconomics. 2010;28:153-162.
37. Goeree R, Levin L, Chandra K, et al. Health technology assessment and primary data collection for reducing uncertainty in decision making. J Am Coll Radiol. 2009;6:332-342.
38. Mortimer D. Reorienting programme budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA) towards disinvestment. BMC Health Serv Res. 2010;10:288.