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
. 2015 Dec 28:15:575.
doi: 10.1186/s12913-015-1178-4.

Development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based program for introduction of new health technologies and clinical practices in a local healthcare setting

Affiliations

Development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based program for introduction of new health technologies and clinical practices in a local healthcare setting

Claire Harris et al. BMC Health Serv Res. .

Abstract

Background: This paper reports the process of establishing a transparent, accountable, evidence-based program for introduction of new technologies and clinical practices (TCPs) in a large Australian healthcare network. Many countries have robust evidence-based processes for assessment of new TCPs at national level. However many decisions are made by local health services where the resources and expertise to undertake health technology assessment (HTA) are limited and a lack of structure, process and transparency has been reported.

Methods: An evidence-based model for process change was used to establish the program. Evidence from research and local data, experience of health service staff and consumer perspectives were incorporated at each of four steps: identifying the need for change, developing a proposal, implementation and evaluation. Checklists assessing characteristics of success, factors for sustainability and barriers and enablers were applied and implementation strategies were based on these findings. Quantitative and qualitative methods were used for process and outcome evaluation. An action research approach underpinned ongoing refinement to systems, processes and resources.

Results: A Best Practice Guide developed from the literature and stakeholder consultation identified seven program components: Governance, Decision-Making, Application Process, Monitoring and Reporting, Resources, Administration, and Evaluation and Quality Improvement. The aims of transparency and accountability were achieved. The processes are explicit, decisions published, outcomes recorded and activities reported. The aim of ascertaining rigorous evidence-based information for decision-making was not achieved in all cases. Applicants proposing new TCPs provided the evidence from research literature and local data however the information was often incorrect or inadequate, overestimating benefits and underestimating costs. Due to these limitations the initial application process was replaced by an Expression of Interest from applicants followed by a rigorous HTA by independent in-house experts.

Conclusion: The program is generalisable to most health care organisations. With one exception, the components would be achievable with minimal additional resources; the lack of skills and resources required for HTA will limit effective application in many settings. A toolkit containing details of the processes and sample materials is provided to facilitate replication or local adaptation by those wishing to establish a similar program.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Four step model for evidence-based process change
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Program logic model for Technology/Clinical Practice Program
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Revised application process for introduction of new TCP

References

    1. Department of Human Services . Guidance for Victorian public health services to establish Technology/Clinical Practice Committees. Melbourne: Victorian Government; 2006.
    1. Gallego G. Hospital drug and therapeutics committees in Australia: is there a role for economic evaluation at the institutional level? Int J Clin Pharm. 2011;33(6):895–7. doi: 10.1007/s11096-011-9565-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lourenco T, Grant A, Burr J, Vale L. Local decision-makers views’ of national guidance on interventional procedures in the UK. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2010;15(Suppl 2):3–11. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2009.009090. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Schumacher I, Zechmeister I. Assessing the impact of health technology assessment on the austrian healthcare system. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013;29(1):84–91. doi: 10.1017/S0266462312000748. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Robinson JS, Turnbull DA. Changing healthcare organisations to change clinical performance. Med J Aust. 2004;180(6 Suppl):S61–2. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources