Using the analytic hierarchy process as a clinical engineering tool to facilitate an iterative, multidisciplinary, microeconomic health technology assessment

被引:48
作者
Sloane, EB [1 ]
Liberatore, MJ [1 ]
Nydick, RL [1 ]
Luo, WH [1 ]
Chung, QB [1 ]
机构
[1] Villanova Univ, Dept Decis & Informat Technol, Villanova, PA 19085 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院; 美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0305-0548(02)00187-9
中图分类号
TP39 [计算机的应用];
学科分类号
081203 ; 0835 ;
摘要
Many articles have been written about applying decision support systems to clinical tasks, but little has been published about the complex problem of capital equipment decision making in healthcare. This problem has become the domain of health technology assessment experts, but there are few decision support systems reported in the literature. Technology assessment practitioners generally evaluate whether appropriate scientific studies exist to justify implementing a technology, or consider the macroeconomic implications that adopting a new technology may have on existing populations, economies, diseases, drugs, procedures, or devices. Following the confirmation of a technology's utility, however, the published materials available to assist the individual hospital or health system in their microeconomic health technology assessment (HTA) are very limited. In this study, the analytic hierarchy process is used to support and document the evolution of the multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary process of selecting neonatal ventilators for a new women's health hospital. Although the best ventilator had the highest purchase price, its safety, clinical and technical features, plus lower operating cost factors led to its high score. This study demonstrates the AHPs ability to facilitate an understanding of the underlying criteria and priorities, and to successfully support the hospital's purchasing negotiation. For these reasons, the AHP should be considered for use as a decision support tool for future HTA projects.
引用
收藏
页码:1447 / 1465
页数:19
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], THINGS THAT MAKE US
[2]  
Barbarosoglu G., 1997, Production and Inventory Management Journal, V38, P14
[3]  
BAULT TJ, 1993, J CLIN ENG, V18, P149
[4]   The continuing value of the apgar score for the assessment of newborn infants. [J].
Casey, BM ;
McIntire, DD ;
Leveno, KJ .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2001, 344 (07) :467-471
[5]  
Dolan James G., 2000, Health Expect, V3, P37, DOI 10.1046/j.1369-6513.2000.00075.x
[6]  
Eccleston R C., 2001, A model regulatory program for medical devices: an international guide
[7]  
*EM CAR RES I, 1970, HLTH DEVICES J, V1, P7
[8]  
*EM CAR RES I, 1998, HLTH DEVICES J, V27, P308
[9]  
*EM CAR RES I, 1990, EAS US GUID PLYM M E
[10]  
*EM CAR RES I, 1985, HLTH DEVICES J, V14, P39