Volume 30, Issue 1 (1-2016)                   Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Mobinizadeh M, Raeissi P, Nasiripour A A, Olyaeemanesh A, Tabibi S J. The health systems' priority setting criteria for selecting health technologies: A systematic review of the current evidence. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2016; 30 (1) :146-162
URL: http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/article-1-3534-en.html
Department of Health Services Management, School of Management and Medical Information Science, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. , raeissi2009@yahoo.com
Abstract:   (5459 Views)

Background: In the recent years, using health technologies to diagnose and treat diseases has had a considerable and accelerated growth. The proper use of these technologies may considerably help in the diagnosis and treatment of different diseases. On the other hand, unlimited and unrestricted entry of these technologies may result in induced demand by service providers. The aim of this study was to determine the appropriate criteria used in health technologies priority-setting models in the world.

  Methods: Using MESH and free text, we sought and retrieved the relevant articles from the most appropriate medical databases (the Cochrane Library, PubMed and Scopus) through three separate search strategies up to March 2015. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) Studies with specific criteria; 2) Articles written in English; 3) Those articles conducted in compliance with priority setting of health technologies. Data were analyzed qualitatively using a thematic synthesis technique.

  Results: After screening the retrieved papers via PRISMA framework, from the 7,012 papers, 40 studies were included in the final phase. Criteria for selecting health technologies (in pre assessment and in the assessment phase) were categorized into six main themes:  1) Health outcomes; 2) Disease and target population; 3) Technology alternatives; 4) Economic aspects; 5) Evidence; 6) and other factors. “Health effects/benefits” had the maximum frequency in health outcomes (8 studies); “disease severity” had the maximum frequency in disease and target population (12 studies); “the number of alternatives” had the maximum frequency in alternatives (2 studies); “cost-effectiveness” had the maximum frequency in economic aspects (15 studies); “quality of evidence” had the maximum frequency in evidence (4 studies); and “issues concerning the health system” had the maximum frequency in other factors (10 studies).

  Conclusion: The results revealed an increase in the number of studies on health technologies priority setting around the world, and emphasized the necessity of application of a multi- criteria approach for appropriate decision making about healthcare technologies in the health systems.

Full-Text [PDF 1136 kb]   (1818 Downloads)    

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.