PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Technology Assessment, Biomedical”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12Linked to original sources
PubMed1991

[Radiology in Scandinavia].

In 1987 the Nordic Institutes of Hospital Research joint co-operation on medical technology assessment (NEMT) performed a study of the national differences in the utilization of diagnostic techniques in the radiological laboratories. Major differences between the countries were found in both total and specific examination rates. In total numbers of conventional investigations, Finland performed about 60 per cent more investigations than the average of Sweden, Denmark and Norway, which all were of the same level of approximately 470 examinations per 1,000 inhabitants. The difference was attributed mainly to X-ray investigations executed at the primary health care level in Finland. Other remarkable differences were in particular observed in techniques of increasing or decreasing importance.

Angiography↗
PubMed1988

The introduction of low-osmolar contrast agents in radiology. Medical, economic, legal, and public policy issues.

This case study of the public policy implications of introducing a new technology in radiology, namely, low-osmolar contrast media (LOCM), raises the issues of whether and how to place appropriate limits on new technologies. Although these contrast media represent small episodic costs, they may add up to an aggregate expenditure of nearly $1 billion per year if used for all contrast injections. As a result, this technology raises a number of important medical, economic, legal, and public policy questions. Our cost-effectiveness analysis and an analysis of the medical evidence suggest that LOCM should be limited to high-risk patients. We discuss in this article how the legal system might respond to such limitations, and we consider various public policy options for adopting restrictions on use. We conclude that the medical profession should take the lead in developing protocols for appropriate assessment, reimbursement, and use of LOCM.

Contrast Media↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Assessment and approval of medical devices used in diagnostic imaging in the United States.

Development of new and improved medical imaging technology has been increasing rapidly over the past two decades. While media attention has focused on the revolutionary advances, such as computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and metabolic assessment by positron emission tomography, important progress has also been made in the more conventional modalities, including contrast radiography, ultrasound, scintigraphy and mammography. These evolutionary developments have produced fundamental changes in the character of imaging information and in the methods of its acquisition, storage, manipulation, analysis and display. The assessment process-vis-à-vis safety, effectiveness, efficacy or cost-has moved from a previously well-defined physical and engineering evaluation to one of assessing quality, relevance and appropriateness of the "information." A regulatory scheme has evolved in the U.S., whereby the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is responsible for assuring that new medical devices be approved for commercial distribution only if their safety and effectiveness can be assured. Clear distinctions should be drawn between the FDA "approval" process, assessment of clinical efficacy, and planning for health care delivery.

Certificate of Need↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Toward the development of a technology assessment methodology in medical diagnosis and therapy.

Existing priorities for the provision of health care are increasingly seen to be arbitrary and inequitable. The informed public in developed countries is demanding a rational, consistent and responsible program for the apportioning of health resources, both in their own and in Third World nations. An evaluation methodology is proposed for measuring the main aspects of a nation's health. It is based on a flowchart of averaged, relative, weighted, multiple parameters, each comprised of the elements of technology. It is designed as an objective system--superseding former weighting processes, which were influenced by ambition, prestige, prejudice and narrow politics--and has sufficient flexibility to accommodate both the anticipated and the unforeseen.

Health Priorities↗
PubMed1986

Technology transfer.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Developing Countries↗
PubMed1985

Technology: a strategic factor in hospital planning.

Hospital administrators cannot afford to sit back, amazed at technological progress. They must be able to assess technology--both currently available and planned for the future--and they must be willing to adapt to rapid change. Assessing and planning for technology are essential for future survival.

Diffusion of Innovation↗
PubMedDate not supplied

The role of technology in the long-term care for the aged.

High technology is often erroneously implicated as a principal cause of increased medical care costs. However, thoughtful application of high technology can reduce the cost and improve the quality of medical care, especially in long-term care of the aged. The Veterans Administration rigorously evaluates various forms of high technology before incorporating them into its medical care system.

Aging↗
PubMed1981

Technology: focus on management grows in face of high costs.

High costs and an increasing concern about the appropriate use of medical care technology have prompted users, producers, and the government to place a greater emphasis on the need for better evaluation and management of technology developments.

Government Agencies↗
PubMed1980

The medical technologist and evaluation of health technologies.

Increased social pressure for accountability in the medical care fields and recognition that new and expensive health care technologies have limited impact on health status has brought acknowledgment that the United States has no rational approach to identification, evaluation, and implementation of innovative medical technologies. As in other health care sectors, comprehensive and long-range evaluation of impacts of new medical laboratory technology on both the laboratory and the patient are lacking. It is evident that as questions concerning cost effectiveness are raised, more rigorous evaluation of laboratory technologies must be undertaken. Federal legislation has mandated creation of a National Center for Health Care Technology (NCHCT) with a primary mission to stimulate assessment of health care technologies. This legislation could provide the basis for a more rational approach to technology assessment. Potential implications of technology assessment on laboratory practices and third party reimbursement policy, as well as potential opportunities for laboratory professionals, are discussed.

Government Agencies↗