Back to Search
Start Over
Innovative medical devices and hospital decision making: a study comparing the views of hospital pharmacists and physicians
- Source :
- Australian Health Review, Australian Health Review, CSIRO Publishing, 2016, 40 (3), pp.257. ⟨10.1071/AH15039⟩
- Publication Year :
- 2016
- Publisher :
- HAL CCSD, 2016.
-
Abstract
- International audience; Objectives Many university hospitals have developed local health technology assessment processes to guide informed decisions about new medical devices. However, little is known about stakeholders’ perceptions and assessment of innovative devices. Herein, we investigated the perceptions regarding innovative medical devices of their chief users (physicians and surgeons), as well as those of hospital pharmacists, because they are responsible for the purchase and management of sterile medical devices. We noted the evaluation criteria used to assess and select new medical devices and suggestions for improving local health technology assessment processes indicated by the interviewees. Methods We randomly selected 18 physicians and surgeons (nine each) and 18 hospital pharmacists from 18 French university hospitals. Semistructured interviews were conducted between October 2012 and August 2013. Responses were coded separately by two researchers. Results Physicians and surgeons frequently described innovative medical devices as ‘new’, ‘safe’ and ‘effective’, whereas hospital pharmacists focused more on economic considerations and considered real innovative devices to be those for which no equivalent could be found on the market. No significant difference in evaluation criteria was found between these groups of professionals. Finally, hospital pharmacists considered the management of conflicts of interests in local health technology assessment processes to be an issue, whereas physicians and surgeons did not. Conclusions The present study highlights differences in perceptions related to professional affiliation. The findings suggest several ways in which current practices for local health technology assessment in French university hospitals could be improved and studied. What is known about the topic? Hospitals are faced with ever-growing demands for innovative and costly medical devices. To help hospital management deal with technology acquisition issues, hospital-based health technology assessment has been developed to support decisions. However, little is known about the different perceptions of innovative medical devices among practitioners and how different perceptions may affect decision making. What does this paper add? This paper compares and understands the perceptions of two groups of health professionals concerning innovative devices in the university hospital environment. What are the implications for practitioners? Such a comparison of viewpoints could facilitate improvements in current practices and decision-making processes in local health technology assessment for these medical products.
- Subjects :
- Male
MESH: Pharmacists
medicine.medical_specialty
Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
MESH: Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice
MESH: Medical Staff, Hospital
Population health
Pharmacists
Interviews as Topic
03 medical and health sciences
0302 clinical medicine
Nursing
Inventions
MESH: Decision Making, Organizational
Health care
Medical Staff, Hospital
Medicine
Humans
030212 general & internal medicine
MESH: Qualitative Research
Decision Making, Organizational
Qualitative Research
Government
Health economics
MESH: Purchasing, Hospital
MESH: Humans
business.industry
030503 health policy & services
Health Policy
Public health
Health technology
MESH: Equipment and Supplies
Viewpoints
MESH: Interviews as Topic
MESH: Male
3. Good health
MESH: Inventions
Equipment and Supplies
Purchasing, Hospital
Female
[SDV.SPEE]Life Sciences [q-bio]/Santé publique et épidémiologie
0305 other medical science
business
MESH: Female
Qualitative research
Subjects
Details
- Language :
- English
- ISSN :
- 01565788 and 14498944
- Database :
- OpenAIRE
- Journal :
- Australian Health Review, Australian Health Review, CSIRO Publishing, 2016, 40 (3), pp.257. ⟨10.1071/AH15039⟩
- Accession number :
- edsair.doi.dedup.....2260e18f997cd75ccdf9f3008f6a1412