EVALUATION OF PATIENT INVOLVEMENT IN A HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 166-170

  Dipankui, Mylène Tantchou ^a   Gagnon, Marie Pierre ^a   Desmartis, Marie ^a   Légaré, France ^a   Piron, Florence ^b   Gagnon, Johanne ^a   Rhiands, Marc ^c   Coulombe, Martin ^c  

^a LAVAL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL   (Canada)

^c Quebec University Hospital   (Canada)

Author keywords

Evaluation; Health technology assessment; Mental health; Patient consultation; Patient participation

Indexed keywords

HEALTH CARE;

EVALUATION; HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS; MENTAL HEALTH; PATIENT CONSULTATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION;

HOSPITALS;

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CAREGIVER; CONSULTATION; CONTENT ANALYSIS; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; MANAGER; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; SCIENTIST; SEMI STRUCTURED INTERVIEW; THEMATIC ANALYSIS; TRIANGULATION; INTERVIEW; PROCEDURES;

HUMANS; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT, BIOMEDICAL;

EID: 84937636006     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462315000240     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Kreis J, Schmidt H. Public engagement in health technology assessment and coverage decisions: A study of experiences in France, Germany, and the United Kingdom. J Health Polit Policy Law. 2013;38:89-122.
2. Whitty JA. An International Survey of the Public Engagement Practices of Health Technology Assessment Organizations. Value Health. 2013;16:155-163.
3. Abelson J, Bombard Y, Gauvin FP, Simeonov D, Boesveld S. Assessing the impacts of citizen deliberations on the health technology process. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29:282-289.
4. Menon D, Stafinski T. Role of patient and public participation in health technology assessment and coverage decisions. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;11:75-89.
5. Facey K, Boivin A, Gracia J, et al. Patients' perspectives in health technology assessment: A route to robust evidence and fair deliberation. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2010;26:334-340.
6. Pivik J, Rode E, Ward C. A consumer involvement model for health technology assessment in Canada. Health Policy. 2004;69:253-268.
7. Health Equality Europe. Understanding health technology assessment (HTA). Health Equality Europe; 2008.
8. British Medical Association. Patient and public involvement - A toolkit for doctors. London: BMA; 2011.
9. Segal L. The importance of patient empowerment in health system reform. Health Policy. 1998;44:31-44.
10. Gagnon M-P, Desmartis M, Lepage-Savary D, et al. Introducing patients' and the public's perspectives to health technology assessment: A systematic review of international experiences. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:31-42.
11. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Mockford C, Barber R. The GRIPP checklist: Strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:391-399.
12. Crawford MJ, Rutter D, Manley C, et al. Systematic review of involving patients in the planning and development of health care. BMJ. 2002;325:1263.
13. Ministère de la santé et des services sociaux. Vers un changement de pratique afin de réduire le recours à la contention et à l'isolement. Québec: Ministèredelasanté et des services sociaux; 2008. French
14. Dimant J. Avoiding physical restraints in long-term care facilities. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2003;4:207-215.
15. Gagnon MP, Desmartis M, Dipankui MT, Gagnon J, St-Pierre M. Alternatives to seclusion and restraint in psychiatry and in long-term care facilities for the elderly: Perspectives of service users and family members. Patient. 2013;6:269-280.
16. Gagnon MP, Gagnon J, St-Pierre M, et al. Involving patients in HTA activities at local level: A study protocol based on the collaboration between researchers and knowledge users. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:14.
17. Unité d'évaluation des technologies et des modes d'intervention en santédu CHU de Québec (UETMIS du CHU de Québec). Évaluation de la surveillance constante et des technologies d'aide à la surveillance comme mesures alternatives à la contention et à l'isolement chez des adultes hospitalisés ou en centres d'hébergement. Québec: CHU de Québec; 2012. French
18. Unité d'évaluation des technologies et des modes d'intervention en santédu CHU de Québec. Évaluation des pratiques, des barrières et des facilitateurs de l'implantation des mesures de remplacement de la contention et de l'isolement dans le RUIS de l'Université Laval. Québec: CHU de Québec; 2013. French
19. Unité d'évaluation des technologies et des modes d'intervention en santédu Centre hospitalier universitaire de Québec (UETMIS du CHUQ). Évaluation des mesures alternatives à la contention et à l'isolement chez les patients adultes hospitalisés ou en centre d'hébergement. Québec: Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Québec; 2010. French
20. Huberman MA, Miles MB. Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications; 1994.
21. Hansen HP, Lee A, Van Randwijk CB. Patient aspects: A review of fifty-eight Danish HTA reports. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:330-336.
22. Tjornhoj-Thomsen T, Hansen HP. Knowledge in health technology assessment: Who, what, how? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011;27:324-329.
23. Brennan C. Case 9: Canadian Blood Services' stakeholder engagement for organ and tissue donation. In: Canadian Institutes of Health Research, ed. CIHR's Citizen Engagement in Health Casebook. Ottawa: Canadian Institutes of Health Research; 2012:57-60.
24. Boivin A, Currie K, Fervers B, et al. Patient and public involvement in clinical guidelines: International experiences and future perspectives. Qual Saf Health Care. 2010;19:e22.
25. Simpson EL, House AO. User and carer involvement in mental health services: From rhetoric to science. Br J Psychiatry. 2003;183:89-91.