• Chinese medical journal · Jun 2018

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

    • Suo-Wei Wu, Tong Chen, Qi Pan, Liang-Yu Wei, Qin Wang, Chao Li, Jing-Chen Song, and Ji Luo.
    • Department of Medical Administration, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing 100730, China.
    • Chin. Med. J. 2018 Jun 5; 131 (11): 1327-1332.

    BackgroundThe 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.MethodsA 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.ResultsTwenty-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.ConclusionsAs 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.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.