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
. 2019 Jul 23;17(1):72.
doi: 10.1186/s12961-019-0469-3.

Hospital staff perspectives towards health technology assessment: data from a multidisciplinary survey

Orna Tal  1   2 , Meirav Booch  3   4 , Sara Bar-Yehuda  5
Affiliations

Hospital staff perspectives towards health technology assessment: data from a multidisciplinary survey

Orna Tal et al. Health Res Policy Syst. .

Abstract

Background: Technology adoption in hospitals is usually based on cost-effectiveness analysis, feasibility and potential success. Different countries have embraced a range of principles to accomplish an effective comprehensive process of health technology assessment (HTA). The aim of the study was to analyse the viewpoints and relative weight of technology-oriented hospital staff members toward the clinical, social, technological and economic aspects of HTA.

Methods: Using a structured questionnaire, a survey was conducted among different professionals in an 850-bed hospital.

Results: We revealed a range of viewpoints among hospital staff members according to their personal characteristics and professional standpoints. The clinical aspects of HTA were considered 'highly important' (HI) by most participants, especially the 'lifesaving' parameter. Similarly, the 'lack of effective alternative technology' was ranked HI by a high percentage of participants, independent of their profession. Economic aspects were ranked HI only by half of the participants, while social and technological aspects were ranked HI only by a relatively low percentage. Nurses added 'improving quality of life', 'increasing teamwork efficiency' and 'improving medical standards'. Allied health professionals focused on 'lack of effective alternative technologies' as a main argument for adoption of HTA, alongside increasing efficiency, budget savings and contribution to hospital reputation. Engineers emphasised the requirement of significant investment in infrastructure and increasing efficiency. Administrators ranked patient experience as HI. Interestingly, the high ranking of social aspects correlated with older responders, while junior staff ranked safety significantly higher.

Conclusions: A multi-perspective multidisciplinary approach would be beneficial for policy-makers at hospitals and even on a national scale in Israel.

Keywords: Hospital-based health technology assessment; hospital personnel survey; multi criteria decision analysis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

    1. Banta D. What is technology assessment? Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:7. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090333. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Office of Technology Assessment . US Congress, Assessing the Efficacy & Safety of Medical Technologies. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office; 1978.
    1. Banta D, Jonsson E, Childs P. History of the international societies in health technology assessment: International Society for Technology Assessment in Health Care and Health Technology Assessment International. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25:19–23. doi: 10.1017/S0266462309090369. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banta D. The development of health technology assessment. Health Policy. 2003;63:121. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00059-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Oortwijn W, Mathijssen J, Banta D. The role of health technology assessment on pharmaceutical reimbursement in selected middle-income countries. Health Policy. 2010;95:174. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.12.008. - DOI - PubMed