Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T05:48:01.192Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Technology Assessment in a User Perspective-Experiences with Drug Technology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Ebba Holme Hansen
Ebba Holme Hansen
Affiliation:
Royal Danish School of Pharmacy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Drugs have a central place among medical technologies, and medical technology assessment can learn from the established regulation of drug technology. This article outlines how users' experiences are not part of the basis on which decisions are made today, although this knowledge is imperative for identifying the problems that are not uncovered or foreseen by today's drug assessments. Further, users' interests might not be part of assessments that are based on the controlled clinical trial. A framework for drug technology assessments based on a user perspective is suggested.

Type
General Essays
Information
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 8 , Issue 1 , Winter 1992 , pp. 150 - 165
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

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

1.Andreasen, P. B.Medicinsk Teknologivurdering (Medical technology assessment). Rapport til Folketingens udvalg angående videnskabelig forskning, København, 1980.Google Scholar
2.Andreasen, P. B. Medicinsk teknologivurdering. In Rapport fra konferencen Helsetjeneste-forskning og medicinsk teknologivurdering 31. august 1982 (In Report from the Conference on Health Services Research and Medical Technology Assessment). Copenhagen: Statens L⅓gevidenskabelige Forskiningsråd, 1982, 27–31.Google Scholar
3.Andreasen, P. B.Consensus conferences in different countries. Aims and perspectives. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1988, 4, 305–08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Adreasen, P. B. Indledning. In Medicinsk Teknologivurdering. Status og perspektiver — nationale og internationale erfaringer. Copenhagen: MEDIF, 1989, 6–8.Google Scholar
5.Arluke, A.Judging drugs: Patients conceptions of therapeutic efficacy in the treatment of arthritis. Human Organizations, 1980, 39, 84–88.Google Scholar
6.Armstrong, D.Clinical sense and clinical science. Social Science & Medicine, 1977, 11, 599–601.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Banta, D. Empirical work on technology diffusion. In Andreasen, P. B. & Lund, A. B. (eds.), Life-cycles of medical technologies. Copenhagen: Academic Publishing, 1990, 21–36.Google Scholar
8.Bem × rkninger til forslag til lov om et teknologin × vn, lovforslag nr. L 167 (Remarks on Bill on a Technology Board). Bill No. L 167, sheet no. 928.Google Scholar
9.Bodewitz, H., Buurma, H., & Vries, G. de. Regulatory Science and the social management of trust in medicines. In Pinch, T. J., Bijker, W. E., & Hughes, T. P. (eds.), New directions in the social study of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1987.Google Scholar
10.Bruun, K., et al. (eds.). Controlling psychotropic drugs, the Nordic Experience. London: Croom-Helm & St. Martin’s Press, 1983.Google Scholar
11.Burns, T. Technology, politics and social change. In The shaping of social organization: Social rule system theory with applications. London: Sage Publications, 1986.Google Scholar
12.Buyse, M. E., Staquet, M. J., & Sylvester, R. J. (eds.). Cancer clinical trials. Methods and practice. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
13.Christie, N. In Kontrollpolitik och psykofarmaka (Control policy and psychopharmaceuticals). Nordisk Utredningsserie NU:B 1977, 11, 95.Google Scholar
14.Christrup, H., & Land, B. Ultralydstransducer på gravide maver (Ultrasound transducer on pregnant bellies). In Balslev, J. (ed.), Når kvinder vurderer teknologi. … Kvinder på tvaers/Tek-Sam Forlag, 1985, 31–52.Google Scholar
15.Conrad, P.The meaning of compliance. Social Science & Medicine, 1985, 20, 29–38.Google Scholar
16.Cronberg, T. (ed.). Metoder i teknologivurdering (Methods in technology assessment). Copenhagen: Teknik-Samfund Initiativet, Statens Samfundsvidenskabelige Forskningsråd, 1986.Google Scholar
17.Cronberg, T. (ed.). Mod på teknologien. 6 metoder til folkelig teknologivurdering (Zest for technology. Six methods in lay technology assessment). Copenhagen: Teknologinævnet, 1989.Google Scholar
18.Editorial. Streptomycin in pulmonary tuberculosis. Lancet, 1948, ii, 733.Google Scholar
19.Gjørup, T.Klinisk vurdering af diagnostiske undersøgelsesmetoder (Clinical assessment of diagnostic examination methods). L⅓geforeningens Forlag, 1988.Google Scholar
20.Hamilton, M.Lectures on the methodology of clinical research. Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1974.Google Scholar
21.Hansen, E. H.Kontrol af l⅓Sgemidler—eller lovkundskab på en anden måde (Control of drugs —Or a different way of jurisprudence). Farmaceutisk Tidende, 1983, 93, 413–21.Google Scholar
22.Hansen, E. H.About the drug control’s lacking ability to predict and prevent drug problems. Paper to the 4th Social Pharmacy Workshop, Stockholm, 09 8–10, 1986.Google Scholar
23.Hansen, E. H.Rationality and common sense in Danish drug therapy. Journal of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 1988, 5, 105–13.Google Scholar
24.Hansen, E. H. Involving users in drug information. In Muller, N. F., & Hekster, Y. A. (eds.), Progress in clinical pharmacy. Rational use of drugs. Amsterdam: European Society of Clinical Pharmacy & Amsterdam Medical Press, 1990, 144–51.Google Scholar
25.Hansen, E. H., & Gyldmark, M.Psykofarmakaforbruget—fordeling, udvikling (The use of psychotropic drugs — Distribution, development). Copenhagen: Institut for Samfunds-farmaci & Sundhedsstyrelsen, 1990.Google Scholar
26.Hansen, E. H., Henriksen, H. H., Münster, K., & Schulsinger, L.P-pillen: En prøvelse for positivismen (The pill: A challenge to positivism). Naturkampen, 1979, 3, 8–12.Google Scholar
27.Hansen, E. H., & Launsø, L.Development, use and evaluation of drugs: The dominating technology in the health care system. Social Science & Medicine, 1987, 25, 65–73.Google Scholar
28.Hansen, E. H., & Launsø, L.Drugs and users — Problems and new directions. Health Promotion, 1988, 3, 241–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
29.Hansen, E. H., & Launsø, L.Is the controlled clinical trial sufficient as a drug technology assessment? Journal of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 1989, 6, 117–26.Google Scholar
30.Hansen, E. H., Launsø, L., & Morgall, J.Forsog, I+ring, evaluering. Samarbejde melle brugerorganisationer og apoteksfarmaceuter om I+gemiddelanvendelse (Experiment, learning, evaluation. Collaboration between users’ organizations and pharmacists about drug use). Copenhagen: Institut for Samfundsfarmaci, 1989.Google Scholar
31.Harding, J. M., & Modell, M.How Patients manage asthma. Journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 1985, 35, 226–28.Google ScholarPubMed
32.Harris, E. L., & Fitzgerald, J. D.The principles and practice of clinical trials. Edinburgh: E. & S. Livingstone, 1970.Google Scholar
33.Hemminki, E., & Falkum, E.Psychotropic drug registration in the Scandinavian countries: The role of clinical trials. Social Science & Medicine, 1980, 14A, 547–59.Google Scholar
34.Jennett, B.Assessment of clinical technologies. Importance for provision and use. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1988, 4, 435–45.Google Scholar
35.Jensen, T.Ø. Publikumserfaringer med forvaltningen (The public’s experiences with the civil service). Norsk Statsvitenskapelig Tidsskrift, 1986, 2, 7–29.Google Scholar
36.Jungk, R., & Müllert, N.Håndbog i fremtidsv+rksteder (Handbook in future workshops) Copenhagen: Politisk Revy, 1984.Google Scholar
37.Jørgensen, T., & Danneskjold-Samsøe, B.Medicinsk teknologivurdering—hvordan? (Medical technology assessment-How?). Copenhagen: Dansk Sygehus Institut, 1986.Google Scholar
38.Kennedy, J. F.Consumer methods, 1963.Google Scholar
39.Kienle, G., & Burkhardt, R.Der Wirksamkeitsnachweis für Arzneimittel. Analyse einer Illusion. Stuttgart: Urachhaus, 1983.Google Scholar
40.Kruse, P. R. L+ gemiddelpriserne i Danmark indtil 1645. En undersøgelse af lovgivningen or fasts+ttelse afforbrugerpriser på l+gemidler (Medicine’s prices in Denmark until 1645. A study on legislation on consumer prices for medicine). Copenhagen: Institut for Samfundsfarmaci, Danmarks farmaceutiske Højskole, 1990 (submitted).Google Scholar
41.Kuhn, T. S.The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press 1970.Google Scholar
42.Larsen, B. O., & Hansen, E. H.The active medicine user—An idea-generating study of asthmatic patients coping with health problems. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care, 1985, 3, 53–59.Google Scholar
43.Launsø, L., & Rieper, O.Forskning om og med mennesker— metoder og vilkår i samfunds-forskning (Research about and with people — Methods and conditions in social science). Copenhagen: Nyt Nordisk Forlag, Arnold Busck, 1987.Google Scholar
44.Lund, A. B., & Christensen, J. M.Teknologivurdering gennem katalyse af behov (Technology assessment through catalysis of needs). Medie-Kultur, 1986, 2, 33–44.Google Scholar
45.Lyhnøe, N.Is the effect of alternative treatment only a placebo effect? Scandinavian Journal of Social Medicine, 1990, 18, 149–53.Google Scholar
46.McKinlay, J. B.From ‘promising report’ to ‘standard procedure’: Seven stages in the career of a medical innovation. Milbank Memorial Fund Quarterly, 59, 1981, 374–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
47.Meinert, C. L., & Tonascia, S.Clinical trials. Design, conduct, and analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
48.Office of Technology Assessment. Strategies for medical technology assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1982.Google Scholar
49.Office of Technology Assessment. Assessing the efficacy and safety of medical technologies. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1985.Google Scholar
50.Organisering af teknologivurdering i Danmark: Erfaringer og perspektiver(Organization of technology assessment in Denmark: Experiences and perspectives). Copenhagen: Bet⅓nkning afgivet af et udvalg under teknologirådet, 1984.Google Scholar
51.Popper, K. R.The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1968.Google Scholar
52.Remmen, A.Konstruktiv teknologivurdering—om at komme bagklogskaben i forkøbet(Constructive technology assessment—How to forestall the hindsight). Copenhagen: Institut for Samfundsudvikling og Planll⅓gning, Aalborg Universitetscenter, 1990.Google Scholar
53.Sackett, D. L., & Snow, J. C. The magnitude of compliance and non-compliance. In Haynes, R. B., Taylor, D. W., & Sackett, D. L. (eds.), Compliance in health care. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
54.Scocozza, L.Forsøgs-patienter informeres dårligt (Trial-patients are badly informed). Sygeplejersken, 1990, 3, 8–14.Google Scholar
55.Scocozza, L.Magt, etik og videnskab—hvor står farmaceuterne (Power, ethics and science— Where are the pharmacists). Norsk Farmaceutisk Tidsskrift, 1990, 3, 20–23.Google Scholar
56.Sjøstrøm, H., & Nilsson, R.Thalidomide and the power of the drug companies. London: Penguin Books, 1972.Google Scholar
57.Solomon, K., & Hart, R.Pitfalls and prospects in clinical research on antianxiety drugs: Benzodiazepines and placebo — A research review. The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 1978, 39, 823–31.Google Scholar
58.Spriet, A. K., & Simon, P.Methodology of clinical drugs trials. New York: Karger, 1985.Google Scholar
59.Steering Committee on Future Health Scenarios. Anticipating and assessing health care technology, vol. 1. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1987.Google Scholar
60.Sundhedsstyrelsen, . Skal alle gravide kvinder ultralyd-scannes?(Are all Pregnant women to undergo ultrasound?). Copenhagen: Vurdering af en medicinsk teknologi, 1987.Google Scholar
61.Sundhedsstyrelsen, . Medicinsk teknologivurdering—hvad er det?(Medical technology assessment —What is it?). Copenhagen, 1984.Google Scholar
62.Teknologivurdering i Danmark(Technology assessment in Denmark). Copenhagen: Bet1⅓nkning afgivet af et udvalg under Teknologirådet, 1980.Google Scholar
63.Wade, O.Trends and prospects in drug research and development. Xlth Round Table Conference, Geneva, 8th-9th 12 1977, 107.Google Scholar
64.Wulff, H. R.Rationel Klinik(Rational Clinic). Copenhagen: Munks-gaard, 1973.Google Scholar