Development and test of a decision support tool for hospital health technology assessment

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 28, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 460-465

  Sampietro Colom, Laura ^a   Morilla Bachs, Irene ^b   Gutierrez Moreno, Santiago ^b   Gallo, Pedro ^c  

^a HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

^b Fundació Clínic per la Recerca Biomèdica   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Biomedical; Decision Making; Hospital; Technology Assessment

Indexed keywords

BIOMEDICAL; DECISION MAKERS; DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS; DEEP BRAIN STIMULATION; DOT PLOT; FIXED BUDGET; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS; HOSPITAL SETTINGS; INCREMENTAL COST; INNOVATIVENESS; PLATELET RICH PLASMA; PRIORITIZATION; SECOND LAYER; SURGICAL ROBOTS; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS; TWO-DIMENSION;

DECISION MAKING; HOSPITALS; SURGERY;

DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; BRAIN DEPTH STIMULATION; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT TOOL; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; INVESTMENT; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PERFORMANCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK BENEFIT ANALYSIS; ROBOTICS; SAFETY; SCORING SYSTEM; THROMBOCYTE RICH PLASMA;

ALGORITHMS; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DIFFUSION OF INNOVATION; HEALTH CARE SURVEYS; HOSPITALS; HUMANS; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; RISK; SOFTWARE; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84867544632     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462312000487     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. AVALIA-T. Herramienta de Priorización. Observación. http://pritectools. es/Controlador/documentosAction.php (accessed November 5, 2010).
2. AVALIA-T. Herramienta de Priorización. Obsoletas. http://pritectools.es/Controlador/Obsoleta/obsoletaAction.php?idHerramienta = 2 (accessed November 5, 2010).
3. Berghoff WJ, Pietrzak WS, Rhodes RD. Platelet-rich plasma application during closure following total knee arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2006;29:590-598.
4. Briones E, Loscertales M, PérezLozanoMJ, en nombre del Grupo GANT. Proyecto GANT: Metodología de desarrollo y estudio preliminar. Sevilla: Agencia de Evaluación de Tecnologías Sanitarias de Andalucía; 1999.
5. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York: University of York; 2009.
6. Cicchetti A, Marchetti M, Di Bidino R, Corio M. Hospital based health technology assessment world-wide survey. Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment HTAi Sub-interest Group; 2008.
7. Ehlers L, Vestergaard M, Kidholm K, et al. Doing mini-health technology assessments in hospitals: A new concept of decision support in health care? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006;22:295-301.
8. Everts PA, Devilee RJ, Brown MC, et al. Platelet gel and fibrin sealant reduce allogeneic blood transfusions in total knee arthroplasty. Acta Anaesth Scand. 2006;50:593-599.
9. Everts P, Devilee R, Oosterbos CJ, et al. Autologous platelet gel and fibrin sealant enhance the efficacy of total knee arthroplasty: Improved range of motion, decreased length of stay and a reduced incidence of arthrofibrosis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2007;15:888-894.
10. Gafni A, Torrance G. Risk attitude and time preference in health. Manage Sci. 1984;30:440-451.
11. Gardner MJ, Demetrakopoulos D, Klepchick P, Mooar P. The efficacy of autologous platelet gel in pain control and blood loss in total knee arthroplasty. Int Orthopaed. 2007;31:309-313.
12. Kean R. Values and preferences in neo-classical environmental economics. http://www russellkeat net/research/marketboundaries/keat-valuesprefs pdf (accessed November 11, 2010).
13. Kidholm K, Ehlers L, Korsbek L, Kjarby R, Beck M. Assessment of the quality of mini-HTA. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:42-48.
14. MaesoMartínez S, Reza Goyanes M, Blasco Amaro JA, Guerra Rodríguez M. Effectiveness of the surgery realized by means of Da Vinci surgical system. UETS 2007/4. Madrid: Agencia Laín Entralgo; 2009.
15. Mamana JP. Technology evaluation in the hospital setting: Starting from the bottom up. Hosp Med Staff. 1979;8:7-9.
16. Millenson LJ, Slizewski E. How do hospital executives spell technology assessment? "P-l-a-n-n-i-n-g.". Health Manage Q. 1986;:4-8.
17. National Collaborating Center for Chronic Conditions. Parkinson's Disease: National clinical guideline for diagnosis and management in primary and secondary care. London: Royal College of Physicians; 2006.
18. Nielsen CP, Funch TM, Kristensen FB. Health technology assessment: Research trends and future priorities in Europe. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2011;16(Suppl 2):6-15.
19. Peerbooms JC, de Wolf GS, Colaris JW, et al. No positive effect of autolo-gous platelet gel after total knee arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2009;80:557-562.
20. Sampietro-Colom L, Espallargues M, Rodriguez E, et al. Wide social participation in prioritizing patients on waiting lists for joint replacement: A conjoint analysis. Med Decis Making. 2008;28:554-566.
21. SIGN. Critical appraisal: Notes and checklists. http://www sign ac uk/methodology/checklists html (accessed November 5, 2010).
22. Sloane EB. Usinga decision support system tool for healthcare technology assessments. IEEE Eng Med Biol Mag. 2004;23:42-55.
23. Velasco Garrido M, Borlum Kristensen F, Palmhoj Nielsen C, Busse R. Health technology assessment and health policy-making in Europe. Current status, challenges and potential EUnetHTA and European Observatory book on HTA and policy-making. 2008. ISBN 978 92 890 4293 2.
24. Weaver FM, Follett K, Stern M, et al. Bilateral deep brain stimulation vs best medical therapy for patients with advanced Parkinson disease: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2009;301:63-73.