Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review

The Role of Patient Safety in the Device Purchasing Process

In: Advances in Patient Safety: From Research to Implementation (Volume 1: Research Findings). Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2005 Feb.
Affiliations
Free Books & Documents
Review

The Role of Patient Safety in the Device Purchasing Process

Todd R. Johnson et al.
Free Books & Documents

Excerpt

To examine how patient safety considerations are incorporated into medical device purchasing decisions, individuals involved in recent infusion pump purchasing decisions at three different health care organizations were interviewed using a structured interview process. Interview questions covered triggers for the purchasing process; the purchasing process itself; how safety was evaluated and incorporated into the process; and the perceived decision and process quality. The results show strengths and weaknesses within the processes. Strengths included (1) a general perception that patient safety was important and played a role in the decision; (2) the inclusion of a wide range of stakeholders in the decisionmaking process; and (3) the use of device user feedback as a component of the device evaluation process. Weaknesses included (1) safer devices may have been overlooked, as very few alternative devices were considered; (2) two important stakeholders, device users and patients, did not participate directly in the purchasing decisions; (3) the device selected for purchase often was determined before the evaluation process had been completed, and the evaluation process then was used to justify the selection decision; (4) although participants felt they had considered device safety, the device evaluation often was limited to technical safety issues, such as operating to technical specifications, rather than device interface issues that may induce or prevent device usage errors; and (5) no explicit, formal usability testing was conducted at any of the three sites for the purpose of assessing device safety. These weaknesses underscore the need for guidelines and tools to help health care employees better assess issues central to patient safety during the device purchasing process.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Cooper J B, Newbower R S, Long C D et al. Preventable anesthesia mishaps: a study of human factors. Anesthesiology. 1978;49(6):399–406. - PubMed
    1. Sawyer D, Aziz KJ, Backinger CL, et al. Do it by design: an introduction to human factors in medical devices. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Food and Drug Administration. Rockville, MD: Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 1996. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/ humfac/doit.html.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Medical device use-safety: incorporating human factors engineering into risk management. Rockville, MD: Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 2000. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/humfac/1497.html.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Human factors implications of the new GMP rule. Overall requirements of the new quality system regulations. Rockville, MD: Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 1998. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/humfac/hufacimp.html.
    1. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Make sure the device you choose is designed for you. Rockville, MD: Center for Devices and Radiological Health; 2000. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/humfac/ you_choose_checklist.html.

LinkOut - more resources