Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T20:09:45.454Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Methodology of constructive technology assessment in health care

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2007

Kirsten F. L. Douma ,
Kim Karsenberg ,
Marjan J. M. Hummel ,
Jolien M. Bueno-de-Mesquita  and
Wim H. van Harten
Kirsten F. L. Douma
Affiliation:
The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
Kim Karsenberg
Affiliation:
The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
Marjan J. M. Hummel
Affiliation:
University of Twente
Jolien M. Bueno-de-Mesquita
Affiliation:
The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
Wim H. van Harten
Affiliation:
University of Twente and The Netherlands Cancer Institute–Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: Technologies in health care are evolving quickly, with new findings in the area of biotechnological and genetic research being published regularly. A health technology assessment (HTA) is often used to answer the question of whether the new technology should be implemented into clinical practice. International evidence confirms that the results of HTA research sometimes have limited impact on practical implementation and on coverage decisions; the study design is commonly based on the paradigm of stability of both the technology and the environment, which is often not the case. Constructive technology assessment (CTA) was first described in the 1980s. In addition to the traditional HTA elements, this approach also takes into account the technology dynamics by emphasizing sociodynamic processes. With a CTA approach, comprehensive assessment can be combined with an intentional influence in a favorable direction to improve quality.

Methods: In this study, the methodological aspects mainly concerning the diagnostic use of CTA are explained. The methodology will be illustrated using the controlled introduction of a new technology, called microarray analysis, into the clinical practice of breast cancer treatment as a case study. Attention is paid to the operationalization of the phases of development and implementation and the research methods most appropriate for CTA.

Conclusions: In addition to HTA, CTA can be used as a complementary approach, especially in technologies that are introduced in an early stage of development in a controlled way.

Keywords

Technology assessmentBiomedicalDNA microarraysQuality of health care
Type
GENERAL ESSAYS
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 23 , Issue 2 , April 2007 , pp. 162 - 168
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Battista, RN. Expanding the scientific basis of health technology assessment. A research for the next decade. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2006; 22: 275–282.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Berg, M, van, der Grinten T, Klazinga, N. Technology assessment, priority setting, and appropriate care in Dutch health care. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004; 20: 35–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Draborg, E, Gyrd-Hansen, D, Poulsen, PB, Horder, M.International comparison of the definition and the practical application of health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2005; 21: 89–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Hummel, JM. Supporting medical technology development with the analytic hierarchy process. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen: Groningen. Dissertation. 2001.Google Scholar
5.Institute of Medicine. Crossing the quality chasm. Washington DC: National Academic Press; 2001.Google Scholar
6.Johri, M, Lehoux, P. The great escape? Prospects for regulating access to technology through health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003; 19: 179–193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Keesmaat, T.Scenarios of development of teleconsultation services in children's physiotherapy [Master's Thesis]. University of Twente, 2002.Google Scholar
8.Lehoux, P, Tailler, S, Denis, JL, Hivon, M. Redefining health Technology assessment in Canada: Diversification of products and contextualization of findings. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004; 20: 325–336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Leys, M. Health technology assessment: The contribution of qualitative research. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2003; 19: 317–329.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.Molfenter, T, Gustafson, D, Kilo, C, Bhattacharya, A, Olsson, J. Prospective evaluation of a Bayesian Model to predict organisational change. Health Care Manage Rev. 2005; 30: 270–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Oliver, A, Mossialos, E, Robinson, R. Health technology assessment and its influence on health care priority setting. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004; 20: 1–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Poulsen, PB. Health technology assessment and diffusion of health technology. Denmark: Odense University Press; 1999.Google Scholar
13.Rogers, EM. Diffusion of innovations. 5th ed. New York: Free Press; 2003.Google Scholar
14.Schot, JW. Constructive technology assessment and technology dynamics: The case of clean technologies. Sci Technol Human Values. 1992; 17: 36–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Schot, JW, Rip, A. The past and future of constructive technology assessment. Technol Forecast Soc Change. 1996; 54: 251–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.Tunis, SR, Pearson, SD. Coverage options for promising technologies: Medicare's coverage with evidence development. Health Aff. 2006; 5: 1218–1230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
17.Van Harten, WH. The design and construction of a quality management system in rehabilitation. In Dutch. Ph.D. Thesis. Enschede; 1997.Google Scholar
18.Van, Harten WH, Casparie, AF, Fisscher, OA. Methodological considerations on the assessment of quality management systems. Health Policy. 2000; 54: 187–200.Google Scholar
19.Van, Rossum W. Decision-making and medical technology assessment: Three Dutch cases. Knowledge Policy. 1991; 4: 102.Google Scholar
20.Van, de Vijver MJ, He, YD, van't, Veer LJ et al. , A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002; 347: 1999–2009.Google Scholar
21.van't, Veer LJ, Dai, H, van, de Vijver MJ et al. , Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature. 2002; 415: 530–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
22.Willems, D, Schade, E. Social and normative aspects of medical technology (in Dutch). Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd. 1995; 34: 1752–1755.Google Scholar