Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLilford, R.
dc.contributor.authorBurn, S.
dc.contributor.authorDiaconu, Karin
dc.contributor.authorLilford, P.
dc.contributor.authorChilton, P.
dc.contributor.authorBiob, V.
dc.contributor.authorCummins, C.
dc.contributor.authorManaseki-Holland, S.
dc.date.accessioned2018-06-29T22:02:29Z
dc.date.available2018-06-29T22:02:29Z
dc.date.issued2015-01-10
dc.identifierER4567
dc.identifier.citationLilford, R., Burn, S., Diaconu, K., Lilford, P., Chilton, P., Biob, V., Cummins, C. & Manaseki-Holland, S. (2015) An approach to prioritization of medical devices in low-income countries: an example based on the Republic of South Sudan, Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation, vol. 13, , ,
dc.identifier.issn1478-7547
dc.identifier.urihttp://doi.org/10.1186/s12962-014-0027-3
dc.identifier.urihttps://eresearch.qmu.ac.uk/handle/20.500.12289/4567
dc.description.abstractBackground: Efficient and evidence-based medical device and equipment prioritization is of particular importance in low-income countries due to constraints in financing capacity, physical infrastructure and human resource capabilities. Methods: This paper outlines a medical device prioritization method developed in first instance for the Republic of South Sudan. The simple algorithm offered here is a starting point for procurement and selection of medical devices and can be regarded as a screening test for those that require more labour intensive health economic modelling. Conclusions: A heuristic method, such as the one presented here, is appropriate for reaching many medical device prioritization decisions in low-income settings. Further investment and purchasing decisions that cannot be reached so simply require more complex health economic modelling approaches.
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.relation.ispartofCost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation
dc.subjectMedical Devices
dc.subjectEquipment
dc.subjectPrioritization
dc.subjectPurchasing
dc.subjectSelection
dc.subjectLow-Income Country
dc.titleAn approach to prioritization of medical devices in low-income countries: an example based on the Republic of South Sudan
dc.typearticle
dcterms.accessRightspublic
dc.description.facultysch_iih
dc.description.referencetext1. Ministry of Health, G. of S. S., Southern Sudan Commission for Census, S. and E. Southern Sudan Household Health Survey. 2006;304. 2. Ministry of Health, G. of S. S. The basic package of health and nutrition services in secondary and tertiary health care. 2006;43. 3. Ministry of Finance and Economic Planning South Sudan. Republic of South Sudan Donor Book. 2012;152. 4. Achiek M, Lado D. Mapping the specialist medical workforce for Southern Sudan: devising ways for capacity building. South Sudan Med J. 2010;3(2):6-9. 5. National Bureau of Statistics, S. S. South Sudan Statistical Yearbook. 2011;67. 6. World Health Organization. List of medical devices by health care facility Health Post - Outpatient. 2010. 7. World Health Organization. List of medical devices by health care facility Specialized Hospital - Diagnostic. 2010. 8. World Health Organization, John Snow Inc., World Bank, PATH, United Nations Population Fund, Population Action International. Interagency List of Essential Medical Devices for Reproductive Health. 2008. 9. World Health Organization. Guidance for countries on the specifications for managing TB laboratory equipments and supplies. 2011. 10. Musgrove P, Fox-Rushby J. Disease Control Priorities: Chapter 15 Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Priority Setting. In Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries (2nd Edition). 2006;p. 271-286. 11. Baltussen R, Floyd K, Dye C. Cost effectiveness analysis of strategies for tuberculosis control in developing countries. BMJ (Clin Res Ed). 2005;331 (7529):1364. doi:10.1136/bmj.38645.660093.68. 12. Borras C, PAHO, WHO. Organization, Development, Quality Assurance and Radiation Protection in Radiology Services: Imaging and Radiation Therapy. 1997. 13. World Health Organization. Core Medical Equipment. 2011. 14. World Health Organization. Medical devices: Managing the Mismatch (An outcome of the Priority Medical Devices project). 2010. 15. Keller JP, ECRI. Instructions included? Materials management in Health Care. 2010;26-9. 16. Perry L, Malkin R. Effectiveness of medical equipment donations to improve health systems: how much medical equipment is broken in the developing world? Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011;49(7):719-22. doi:10.1007/s11517-011-0786-3. 17. World Health Organization. (n.d.). Procurement process resource guide WHO Medical device technical series. 2011. 18. Temple-Bird C, Kaur M, Lenel A, Kawohl W. How to manage series for healthcare technology: Guide 5 How to Organize the Maintenance of Your Healthcare Technology. TALC. 2005. 19. Dijkhuizen FP, Mol BW, Brlmann HA, Heintz AP. The accuracy of endometrial sampling in the diagnosis of patients with endometrial carcinoma and hyperplasia: a meta-analysis. Cancer. 2000;89(8):1765-72. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11042572. 20. van Dongen H, de Kroon CD, Jacobi CE, Trimbos JB, Jansen FW. Diagnostic hysteroscopy in abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;114(6):664-75. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2007.01326.x. 21. Clark TJ, Voit D, Gupta JK, Hyde C, Song F, Khan KS. Accuracy of hysteroscopy in the diagnosis of endometrial cancer and hyperplasia: a systematic quantitative review. JAMA. 2002;288(13):1610-21. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12350192. 22. Yasmin F, Farrukh R, Kamal F. Efficacy of pipelle as a tool for endometrial biopsy. 2007;23,12-5. 23. Fakhar S, Saeed G, Khan A, Alam A. Validity of pipelle endometrial sampling in patients with abnormal uterine bleeding. Ann Saudi Med. 2008;28(3):188-91. 24. Shillcutt SD, Walker DG, Goodman CA, Mills AJ. Cost effectiveness in low- and middle-income countries: a review of the debates surrounding decision rules. PharmacoEconomics. 2009;27(11):903-17. doi:10.2165/10899580-000000000-00000. 25. WHO CHOICE Collaboration. WHO Guide to Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Making Choices in Health. (T. Tan-Torres, R. Baltussen, T. Adam, R. Hutubessy, A. Acharya, D. B. Evans, & C. J. L. Murray, Eds.). World Health Organization. 2003;329 26. Goldie SJ, Gaffikin L, Goldhaber-Fiebert JD, Gordillo-Tobar A, Levin C, Mah C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of cervical-cancer screening in five developing countries. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(20):2158-68. doi:10.1056/NEJMsa044278. 27. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. NICE What We Do.- Retrieved August 06, 2014, from https://www.nice.org.uk/about/what-we-do. 28. Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health. CADTH About CADTH.- Retrieved August 06, 2014, from http://www.cadth.ca/en/cadth 29. Laxminarayan R, Chow J, Shahid-salles SA. Chapter 2 Intervention Cost-Effectiveness: Overview of Main Messages. In Disease Control Priorities in Developing Countries (2nd Edition). 2006;35-86. 30. Burn SL, Chilton PJ, Gawande AA, Lilford RJ. Peri-operative pulse oximetry in low-income countries: a cost - effectiveness analysis. Bull World Health Organ. 2014; 92(12):858-67 31. Sorenson, C., Drummond, M., & Kanavos, P. Ensuring value for money: The role of health technology assessment in the European Union. 2007;1-179. 32. World Health Organization. WHO: Medical Device Technical Series Development of medical device policies. 2011. 33. Teerawattananon Y, Mugford M. Is it worth offering a routine laparoscopic cholecystectomy in developing countries? A Thailand case study. Cost Effectiveness Res Allocation: C/E. 2005;3:10. doi:10.1186/1478-7547-3-10. 34. Ribeiro RA, Stella SF, Camey SA, Zimerman LI, Pimentel M, Rohde LE, et al. Cost-effectiveness of implantable cardioverter-defibrillators in Brazil: primary prevention analysis in the public sector. Value Health. 2010;13(2):160-8. doi:10.1111/j.1524-4733.2009.00608.x. 35. Ekwueme DU, Weniger BG, Chen RT. Model-based estimates of risks of disease transmission and economic costs of seven injection devices in sub-Saharan Africa. Bull World Health Organ. 2002;80(11):859-70. Retrieved from http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi? artid=2567682&tool=pmcentrez&rendertype=abstract. 36. Nobre FF, Trotta LT, Gomes LF. Multi-criteria decision making-an approach to setting priorities in health care. Stat Med. 1999;18(23):3345-54. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10602156. 37. Baltussen R, Niessen L. Priority setting of health interventions: the need for multi-criteria decision analysis. Cost Effectiveness Res Allocation. 2006;4:14. doi:10.1186/1478-7547-4-14. 38. Cosh E, Girling A, Lilford R, McAteer H, Young T. Investing in new medical technologies: a decision framework. J Commer Biotechnol. 2007;13(4):263-71. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jcb.3050062.
dc.description.volume13
dc.identifier.doihttp://doi:10.1186/s12962-014-0027-3
dc.description.ispublishedpub
dc.description.eprintid4567
rioxxterms.typearticle
refterms.dateFCA2016-10-19
refterms.dateFCD2016-10-19
qmu.authorDiaconu, Karin
qmu.centreInstitute for Global Health and Development
dc.description.statuspub
dc.description.number2


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record