Cargando…

Establishment of a Quantitative Medical Technology Evaluation System and Indicators within Medical Institutions

BACKGROUND: The development and application of medical technologies reflect the medical quality and clinical capacity of a hospital. It is also an effective approach in upgrading medical service and core competitiveness among medical institutions. This study aimed to build a quantitative medical tec...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Suo-Wei, Chen, Tong, Pan, Qi, Wei, Liang-Yu, Wang, Qin, Li, Chao, Song, Jing-Chen, Luo, Ji
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5987505/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29786047
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0366-6999.232804
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: The development and application of medical technologies reflect the medical quality and clinical capacity of a hospital. It is also an effective approach in upgrading medical service and core competitiveness among medical institutions. This study aimed to build a quantitative medical technology evaluation system through questionnaire survey within medical institutions to perform an assessment to medical technologies more objectively and accurately, and promote the management of medical quality technologies and ensure the medical safety of various operations among the hospitals. METHODS: A two-leveled quantitative medical technology evaluation system was built through a two-round questionnaire survey of chosen experts. The Delphi method was applied in identifying the structure of evaluation system and indicators. The judgment of the experts on the indicators was adopted in building the matrix so that the weight coefficient and maximum eigenvalue (λ max), consistency index (CI), and random consistency ratio (CR) could be obtained and collected. The results were verified through consistency tests, and the index weight coefficient of each indicator was conducted and calculated through analytical hierarchy process. RESULTS: Twenty-six experts of different medical fields were involved in the questionnaire survey, 25 of whom successfully responded to the two-round research. Altogether, 4 primary indicators (safety, effectiveness, innovativeness, and benefits), as well as 13 secondary indicators, were included in the evaluation system. The matrix is built to conduct the λ max, CI, and CR of each expert in the survey, and the index weight coefficients of primary indicators were 0.33, 0.28, 0.27, and 0.12, respectively, and the index weight coefficients of secondary indicators were conducted and calculated accordingly. CONCLUSIONS: As the two-round questionnaire survey of experts and statistical analysis were performed and credibility of the results was verified through consistency evaluation test, the study established a quantitative medical technology evaluation system model and assessment indicators within medical institutions based on the Delphi method and analytical hierarchy process. Moreover, further verifications, adjustments, and optimizations of the system and indicators will be performed in follow-up studies.