Basit öğe kaydını göster

Hastane Yöneticilerinin Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Yöntemine İlişkin Görüşlerinin Değerlendirilmesi

dc.contributor.advisorŞahin, Bayram
dc.contributor.authorDilmaç, Elife
dc.date.accessioned2019-04-30T06:26:45Z
dc.date.issued2019-04-29
dc.date.submitted2019-03-29
dc.identifier.citationKAYNAKÇA 1. Advance-HTA, (t.y). Erişim: 07.05.2017. www.advance-hta.eu/ 2. AdhopHTA (t.y.) Erişim: 22 Kasım 2017. http://www.adhophta.eu/ 3. ANHTA (2016). ANHTA 2016 Faaliyet Raporu. ANHTA Birimi Yayını, Ankara. Erişim 24 Eylül 2017, http://www.anhhta.org/index.php/doekuemanlar/cat_view/4-projeler/28 projeler/5- 4. Attieh R., Gagnon M.P. (2012). Implementation of local/ hospital-based health technology assessment initiatives in lowand middle-income countries. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 28:4 (2012), 445–451. 5. Ayyıldız, H., Cengiz, E. (2006). Pazarlama Modellerinin Testinde Kullanılabilecek Yapısal Eşitlik Modeli (YEM) Üzerine Kavramsal Bir İnceleme, Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi İdari bilimler Fakültesi Y.2006, C. 11, S.1 s.63-84. 6. Banta, D., Perry, S. (1997). A history of ISTAHC: A personal perspective on its first 10 years. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1997; 13(3): 430-453. 7. Banta, D. ve Oortwijn, W. (2000). Conclusion: Health technology assessment and health care in the European Union. Int. J. Technol. Assess. Health Care, 16: 626-635. 8. Banta, D. (2003). The Development of Health Technology Assesment. Health Policy 63 (2003) 121-132. 9. Banta, D. (2009). What is technology assesment? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25: Supplement 1 (2009), 7–9. 10. Banta, D. (2018). Perspective: Some Conclusions From My Life In Health Technology Assessment, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 0:0 (2018), Page 1 of 3. 11. Banta, D., Jonsson, E., Childs, P. (2009). History of the international societies in health technology assesment: International Society for Technology assesment in Health Care and Health Technology Assesmnet International. International Journal of technology Assesment in Health care, 25:Supplement 1 (2009), 19-23. 12. Barasa, E.W., Molyneux, S., English, M. ve Clear, S. (2015). Setting healthcare priorities in hospitals: a review of empirical studies. Health Policy and Planning 2015; 30:386–396. 13. Barnsley, P., Marsden, G., Towse A. ve Henshall, C. (2014). Transferability of HTA, Backround Paper, HTAi Asia Policy Forum Meeting 10–11 July 2014, Manila. 14. Battista, R.N. (2006). Expanding the scientific basis of health technology assessment: A research agenda for the next decade, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22:3 (2006), 275–282. 15. Beekhuizen, S. (2016). Thesis on Patient Participation in Hospital-Based HTA Case: Adoption of Hemics HandScan in the APHP. European Masters in Health Economics and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam & University of Oslo. Erişim 16 Kasım 2017, https://www.duo.uio.no/bitstream/handle/10852/52692/EUHEM-Thesis-van-Beekhuizen.pdf?sequence=1 16. Berenson, R.A., Delbanco, S.F. Murray, R., Upadhyay, D.K. (2016). Focused Factories-Specialty Service Expertise, Urban Institute Report. Erişim 21 Ekim 2018. https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/02_focused_factories.pdf 17. Billaux, M., Borget, I., Prognon, P., Pineau, P. ve Martelli, N. (2015). Innovative medical devices and hospital decision making: a study comparing the views of hospital pharmacists and physicians. Australian Health Review. Csiro Publishing. 18. Boudeau-Livinec F., Simon, E., Montagnier-Petrissans, C., Joel, M.E., Fery-Lemonnier, E. (2006). Impact of CEDIT recommendations: An example of health technology assessment in a hospital network. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22:2 (2006), 161–168. Cambridge University Press. U.S.A. 19. Boudard A., Martelli N., Prognon P., Pineau J. (2013). Clinical studies of innovative medical devices: what level of evidence for hospital-based health technology assessment? 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 19 (2013) 697–702. 20. Bredenhoff, E., Lent, W., Harten, W. (2010). Exploring types of focused factories in hospital care: a multiple case study, BMC Health Services Research 2010, 10:154. 21. Burkholder, G.J. ve Harlow L. L. (2003). An Illustration of a Longitudinal Cross-Lagged Design for Larger Structural Equation, Structural Equation Modeling,10(3), 465–486. 22. Busse, R., Orvain, J., Valesco M., Perleth M., Drummond M., Gürtner F., ve diğ., (2002). Best Practice In Undertaking And Reporting Health Technology Assessments; Working Group 4 Report. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 18:2 (2002), 361–422. 23. CADTH (2006). HTA Guidelines for the Economic Evaluation of Health Technologies: Canada, 3rd. Edition, Canadian Agency For Drugs And Technologıes in Health. 24. Callea, G., Patrizio, A., Marsilio, M., Jommi, C., Tarricone, R. (2017). The impact of HTA and procurement practices on the selection and prices of medical devices. Social Science & Medicine 174 (2017) 89-95. 25. Çapık, C. (2014). Geçerlik Ve Güvenirlik Çalışmalarında Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizinin Kullanımı, Anadolu Hemşirelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 2014;17:3 196. 26. Catananti, C., Cicchetti, A., Marcchetti, M. (2005). Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment: the experience of Agostino Gemelli University Hospital’s HTA Unit. Italian Journal of Puclic Health. Ital J Public Health. 2011;2(2): 23–8. 27. Castel A.D. (2018). Better With Age, The Psychology of Successful Aging. Oxford University Press, ISBN: 9780190279981. 28. Ciani, O., Wilcher, B., Van Giessen A., Taylor R.S. (2017). Linking The Regulatory And Reimbursement Processes For Medical Devices: The Need For Integrated Assessments Health Economics Health Econ. 26(Suppl. 1): 13–29. 29. Cicchetti, A. (2012). Hastane Tabanlı STD Kurs Notları. Ankara Numune Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi, Ankara. 30. Cicchetti, A. Marchetti, M. Dibidino, R.,Corio M. (2008). Hospital based health technology assessment world-wide survey. Health Technology Assessment International (HTAi), Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment Sub-Interest Group. Erişim: 20 Mayıs 2017, http://www.gisapitalia.it/nl/072011/pdf/ 31. Cicchetti, A., Sampietro-Colom, L. ve Kidholm, K. (2017). The future of HTA in hospitals: Evidences from the EU Research Project “Adopting Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment in EU” (AdHopHTA). World Hospitals and Health Services – Health Technology Assessment Vol. 53 No.2, p.4-11. 32. Cicchetti, A., L. Lacopino, V., Coretti, S., Fiore A. Marchetti, M., Sampietro-Colom ve diğ., (2018). Toward A Contingency Model For Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: Evıdence From Adhophta Project. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 34(2):1-7. 33. Comittee on Science and Astronautics U.S House of Representatives (1969). A Study of Technology Assessment: Report of the Committee on Public Engineering Policy, National Academy of Engineering. National Academy of Engineering Committee on Public Engineering Policy, United States. Congress. House. Committee on Science and Astronautics. 34. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What Is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications, Journal of Applied Psychology 1993. Vol. 78, No. 1,98-104 Copyright 1993 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0021-90IO/93/J3.00. 35. Cross, S.A., Sugarman, M. (2014). HTAi Policy Forum: Keeping HTA on track, on behalf of the HTAi Policy Forum Intl. J. Of Technology Assessment In Health Care 30:3. 36. Cutforth, G., Peter, A., Taenzer, P. (2011). The Alberta Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Ambassador Program: The Development of a Contextually Relevant, Multidisciplinary Clinical Practice Guideline for Non-specific Low Back Pain: A Review. Physiother Can. 2011 Summer;63(3):278-86. doi: 10.3138/ptc.2009-39P. 37. Daniels, N., Wilt JVD. G. (2016). Health technology assessment, deliberative process, and ethically contested issues January 2016International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 32(1-2):10-15 38. Demirdjian, G. (2015). A 10-Year Hospıtal-Based Health Technology Assessment Program In A Publıc Hospıtal In Argentına International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31:1/2 (2015), Page 1 of 8. Cambridge University Press 2015. 39. Drummond, M. (2009). What are The HTA Process in UK. What is …? Series. Erişim: 28.08.2017, www.whatisseries.co.uk. 40. Drummond, M., Griffin, A., Tarricone, R. (2009). Evaluation for Devices and Drugs-Same or Different? Value in Health Volume 12, Number 4. P.402-406. 41. Drummond, M.F., Schwartz, J.S., Jonsson, B., Luce, B.R., Neuman P.J., Siebert, U., Sullivan S.D., (2008). Key principles for the improved conduct of health technology assessments for resource allocation decisions. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2008;24(3): 244–258. 42. Drummond, M.F., Sculpher, M.j., Torrance, W.G., O’Brien, B.J., Stoddart, G.L. (2005). Methods fort he Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programmes. Third edition, Oxford Medical Publication, Oxford University Press Inc., New York. 43. Dudar, N. (2002). “A study of health technology assessment in Canadian hospitals”. Theses of M.H. Sc. University of Toronto. 44. Dupouy, C., Gagnon M.P. (2016) The influence of hospital-based HTA on technology acquisition decision, International Journal of Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment. 45. Dutot, C., Mercier, G., Borget, I., Sauvebeuf, C., Martelli, N. (2017). Hospıtal-Based Health Technology Assessment For The Adoptıon Of Innovatıve Medıcal Devıces Wıthın French Hospıtals: Opportunıtıes And Challenges For Industry, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 33:2 (2017), 297–302. 46. Eddy, D. (2009). Health Technology Assessment and Evidence-Based Medicine: What Are we Talking About? Value in Health Volume 12 Supplement 2. 47. Ehlers, L., Vestergaard, M., Kidholm, K., Bonnevie, B., Pedersen, P.H., Jorgensen, T., ve diğ., (2006). Doing mini–health technology assessments in hospitals: A New concept of decision support in health care? International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 22:3 (2006), 295–301. 48. Erkorkmaz, Ü., Etikan,.İ, Demir,.O., Özdamar,.K., Sanisoğlu, S.Y. (2012). Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizleri ve Uyum İndeksleri, Turkiye Klinikleri J Med Sci 2013;33(1). 49. EU Health Technology Assesment Network (2014). Strategy for EU Cooperation on Health Technology Assessment, HTA Network, Rome, 29 October 2014. Erişim: 22.07.2017, https://ec.europa.eu. 50. EUnetHTA (t.y.). Erişim:24.11.2017 https://www.eunethta.eu/ 51. EUnetHTA (2011). HTA Adaptation Toolkit Work Package 5 Revised: October 2011 (Versıon 5). Erişim:28.11.2017, http://www.eunethta.eu/sites/default/files/sites/5026.fedimbo.belgium.be/files/EUnetHTA_adptation_toolkit_2011%20version%205.pdf 52. EUnetHTA (2016a). The Çekirdek Model Versiyon 3.0. Erişim: 06 Nisan 2017 https://www.eunethta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/HTAÇekirdekModel3.0-1.pdf 53. EUnetHTA (2016b). The Joint Action on HTA: Technical Annex. Erişim: 10 Nisan 2017. http://www.eunethta.eu/sites/default/files/sites/5026.fedimbo.belgium.be/files/EUnetHTA%20JA1%20Technical%20Annex.pdf 54. EURASSESS (1997). Report from The Eur-Assess Project. Special Section. International Journal of Technology Assessment In Health Care, 13:2 (1997), 133-143. 55. Facey, K., Boivin, A., Gracia, J., Hansen, H., Lo Scalzo, A., Mossman, J., Single, A. (2010). Patients' perspective in health technology assessment: A route to robust evidence and fair deliberation. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 3(26), 334 340. 56. Fasterholdta, I., Krahnc, M., Kidholm, K., Yderstrædeb, K.B. Pedersend K.M. (2016). Review of early assessment models of innovative medicaltechnologies, Health Policy 121 (2017) 870–879. 57. Favaretti C., Cicchetti A., Guarrera G., Marchetti M., Ricciardi, W. (2009). Health technology assessment in Italy. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009;25(Suppl 1):127–33. 58. Finta, H., Kelemen, L., Acs, V. (2013). The Need And Importance Of Implementing Health Technology Assessment. Public Health and Management, AMT, v. II, no. 1, 2013, p. 171. 59. Foglia, E., Lettieri, E., Ferrario, L., Porazzi, E., Garagiola, E., Pagani, R., ve diğ. (2017).Technology Assessment In Hospıtals: Lessons Learned From An Empırıcal Experıment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 33:2 (2017), 288–296. 60. FPH-SEE (Forum for Public Health in South Eastern Europe) (2013). A Handbook for Teachers, Researchers and Health Professionals (2nd edition) Volume I. Health: Systems – Lifestyle – Policies. Ed: Burazeri, G., Kragelj, L.Z. vand Assistant editor: Petrela K. Erişim: 03 Kasım 2017. http://www.seejph.com/public/books/Health-Systems-Lifestyle-Policies.pdf 61. Fuchs, V.R. (1974). Who Shall Live? Health Economics ve Social Choice. Medical Economics. USA. 62. Fuch, S., Olberga, B., Pantelia, D., Perletha, M., Busse, R. (2017). HTA of medical devices: Challenges and ideas for the futurefrom a European perspective Health Policy 121 (2017) 215–229. 63. Gagnon, M.P, Abdeljelil AB, Desmartis M, Legare F., Ouimet M., Gagnon J. ve diğ., (2011). Opportunities to promote efficiency in hospital decision-making through the use of health technology assessment. CHSRF series of reports on cost drivers and health system efficiency: paper 7. Ottawa: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation; 2011. 64. Gagnon, M.P. (2014). Hospital-Based Health Technology Assesment. Developments to Date. Pharmaeconomics (2014) 32:819-824. 65. Gagnon, M.P., Desmartis M., Poder T., Witterman W. (2014a). Effects and repercussions of local/hospital-based health technology assessment (HTA): a systematic review. Systematic Reviews 2014 3:129. 66. Gagnon, M.P., Desmartis, M., Gagnon, J., St‐Pierre, M., Gauvin, F.P., Rhainds, M. ve diğ. (2014b). Introducing the patient's perspective in hospital health technology assessment (HTA): the views of HTA producers, hospital managers and patients, Health Expect. 2014 Dec; 17(6): 888–900. 67. Gagnon, M.P., Desmartis, M., Gagnon, J. ve Michèle, S.P. (2015). Framework For User Involvement In Health Technology Assessment At The Local Level: Views Of Health Managers, User Representatives and Clinicians. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care. Volume 31, Issue 1-2 2015 , pp. 68-77. 68. Gallego, G., Fowler S., Gool, K.V. (2008). Decision makers' perceptions of health technology decision making and priority setting at the institutional level. Aust. Health Rev., 32: 520-527. 69. Gallego, G., Gool, K., Casey, R., Maddern, G. (2013). Surgeons’ Vıews Of Health Technology Assessment In Australıa: Onlıne Pilot Survey, International Journal of Health Technology Assessment, Volume 29, Issue 3, July 2013, p. 309-314. 70. Garrido, V.M., Busse R. (2005). Policy brief, Health technology assessment: An introduction to objectives, role of evidence, and structure in Europe. World Health Organization 2005, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 71. Garrido V.M., Kristensen F.B., Nielsen P.C., Busse R. (2008). Health Technology Assesment and Health Policy-Making in Europe: current status, challenges and potential. Observatory Studies series No. 14 p-1. 72. Garrido, V.M., Gerhardus A., Rottingen J., Busse, R. (2010). "Developing Health Technology Assessment to address health care system needs." Health Policy 94: 196-202. 73. Goodman, C.S., Ahn, R. (1999). Methodological approaches of health technology assessment. International Journal of Medical Informatics 56 (1999) 97–105. 74. Greenwald, L., Cromwell, J., Adamache, W., Bernard, S., Drozd, E., Root, E. ve diğ., (2006). Specialty Versus Community Hospitals: Referrals, Quality, And Community Benefits, Physicians’ commitment to and pride in their specialty hospitals are powerful positive forces. Health Affairs 25, no. 1 (2006): 106–118. 75. Garrett, P., Brown, C. A., Hart-Hester, S., Hamadain, E. Dixon, C., ve diğ, (2006). Identifying Barriers to the Adoption of New Technology in Rural Hospitals: A Case Report. Perspect Health Inf Manag. 2006; 3: 9. 76. Granados, A., Johnson E., Banta, D., Bero L., Bonair A., Cochet, C., ve diğ., (1997). Eur-Assess Project Subgroup Report on Dıssemınatıon And Impact. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 13:2 (1997), 220-286. 77. Gutowski, C., Maa, J., Hoo, K.S., Bosic K.J. (2011). Health technology assessment at the University of California-San Francisco. J Healthc Manag. 2011 Jan-Feb;56(1):15-29; discussion 29-30. 78. Hailey, D. (2016). Commentary on “The influence of hospital-based HTA on technology acquisition decision”, International Journal of Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment, 2016, 1:29-30. 79. Halmesmaki, E., Pasternak, I., Roine, R. (2016). Hospital-based health technology assessment (HTA) in Finland: a case study on collaboration between hospitals and the national HTA unit. Health Research Policy and Systems (2016) 14:25. 80. Harris, C., Garrubba, M., Allen, K., King, R., Kelli, C., Thiagarajan, M. ve diğ., (2015). Development, implementation and evaluation of an evidence-based program for introduction of new health technologies and clinical practices in a local healthcare setting, BMC Health Services Research (2015) 15:575. 81. Health Information and Quality Authority (2014). Guidelines for Stakeholder Engagement in HealthTechnology Assessment in Ireland. Erişim 03 Mart 2018. https://www.hiqa.ie/system/files/HTA-Guidelines-Stakeholder-Engagement.pdf 82. Health Information and Quality Authority (2016). A Guide to Health Technology Assessment at HIQA. HTA Health Information and Quality Authority George’s Court, George’s Lane Dublin, Ireland. 83. Hensball, C., Marthani-Bayne, L., Shuller, T. (2012). Using Health Technology Assessment to Support Optimal Use of Technologies in Current Practice: The Challenge of “Disinvestment. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 28:3 (2012), 203–210. 84. Horwitz, J.R., Hsuan, C., Nichols, A. (2018). The Role of Hospital and Market Characteristics in Invasive Cardiac Service Diffusion. Rev Ind Organ. Springer Science Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018. 85. HTAi. (t.y.). Erişim: 18 Mayıs 2017, http://www.htai.org/htai/what-is-hta.html. 86. Hyer, L.N., Wemmerlo, U., Morris, J.A. (2009). Performance analysis of a focused hospital unit: The case of an integrated trauma center, Journal of Operations Management 27 (2009) 203–219. 87. Ibargoyen-Roteta, N., Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea, I., Asua, J. (2010). Guiding the process of health technology disinvestment. Health Policy 98 (2010) 218–226. 88. IOM (2009). Initial National Priorities for Comparative Effectiveness Research. Washington, Erişim: 11 Eylül 2017 http://www.iom.edu. (Institute of Medicine). 89. INAHTA (t.y). Erişim: 18 Mayıs 2017, http://www.inahta.org/hta-tools-resources/ 90. ISPOR (t.y.). Erişim: 18 Mayıs 2017, http://www.ispor.org/terminology/ 91. Jonsson, E. (2009). History of Health Technology Assesment in Sweden, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25: Supplement 1 (2009), 42–52., Cambridge University Press., U.S.A. 92. Johnson E., Banta, H.D. (1999). Management of health technologies:an international view. British medical Journal, 319:1293-1296. 93. Kahveci, R., Dilmaç, E. (2013). Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Rehberi. ANHTA Birimi Yayını, Ankara. 94. Kaplan, S.R., Porter M.E. (2011). How to Solve the Cost Crisis in Health care. Harvard Business Rewiev, September; 2011, p.47-64. 95. Kidholm, C., Olholm, A.M. (2016). Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment in Denmark, Editors: Laura Sampietro-Colom and Janet Martin Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: The Next Frontier for Health Technology Assessment. Springer, New York. 96. Kidholm, K., Ehlers L., Korsbek, L., Kjærby R., Beck, M. (2009). University of Southern Assessment of the quality of mini-HTA, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25:1 (2009), 42–48. 97. Kidholm, K., Olholm, A.M., Birk-Olsena, M., Cicchetti A., Furec, B., Halmesmäki, E. ve diğ. (2015). Hospital managers’ need for information in decision-making– An interview study in nine European countries. Health Policy 119 (2015) 1424–1432. 98. Kimble, L. Massoud, M.R. (2017). What Do We Mean by Innovation in Healthcare? European Medical Journal. Innovations January- 2017, p.89-91. 99. Knies, S., Lombardi, G., Commers, M., Dauben, H.P., Evers, S., Michelsen, K. ve diğ. (2013). Supporting decision making in cross-border regions: a health technology assessment tool for hospitals. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2013 Jan;29(1):71-8. doi: 10.1017/S0266462312000785. Epub 2012 Dec 20. 100.Kumar, S. Nunne, H.W. (2007). Measuring technical efficiency of specialty hospitals in the US, Journal of Revenue and Pricing Management (2008) 7, 139-152 101.KNAW (2014). Evaluation of new technology in healthcare. In need of guidance for relevant evidence. Amsterdam: KNAW. Erişim: 12 Ekim 2017 https://www.knaw.nl/nl/actueel/publicaties/evaluation-of-newtechnology 102.Lambooij, M.S., Hummel, M.J. (2013). Differentiating innovation priorities among stakeholder in hospital care BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 2013, 13:91 103.Lampe, K., Makela, M., Garrido, M.V., Anttila., H, Autti-Ramö., I, Hicks, N.J. ve diğ., (2009). The HTA core model: a novel method for producing and reporting health technology assessments. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2009 Dec;25 Suppl 2:9-20. 104.Lei, P.W., Wu, Q. (2007). An NCME Instructional Module on Introduction to Structural Equation Modeling: Issuesand Practical Considerations, Educational Measurement, Volume 26, Issue3 Fall 2007, Pages 33-43. 105.Lettieri, E., Masella, C. (2008). Budgeting and health technology assessment: First evidence obtained from proposal forms used to submit the adoption of new technology. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 24:4 (2008), 502–510.2008 Cambridge University Press. Printed in the U.S.A. 106.Lettieri, E., Masella, C. (2009). Priority Setting for technology adoption at hospital level: relevant issues from the literature. Health policy 90(2009), p.81-88. 107.Lettieri, M. (2011). Health Technology Assessment in Hospitals: First Results from a Behavioral Perspective. PhD Dissertation. Politecnico Di Milano Sede di Milano Bovisa, Facoltà di Ingegneria dei Sistemi, Corso di Laurea Specialistica in Ingegneria Gestionale, Italy. 108.Luce, B.R., Drummond, M., Jonsson, B., Neumann, P., Schwartz, J.S., Siebert, U., ve Sullivan S.D. (2010). EBM, HTA, and CER: Clearing the Confusion the Milbank Quarterly, Vol. 88, No. 2, 2010 (pp. 256–276). 109.Mad, P., Geiger-Gritsch, S., Hinterreiter, G., Mathis-Edenhofer, S., Wild, C. (2012). Pre-Coverage Assessments of New Hospital Interventions on Austria: Methodology and 3 Years of Experience. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Cambridge University Press 2012. 28:2 (2012), 171–179. 110.Makela, M., Roine, P.R. (2009). Health technology assessment in Finland. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25:Supplement 1 (2009), 102–107. Cambridge University Press. Printed in the U.S.A. 111.Mamana, J.P. (1979). Technology evaluation in the hospital setting: starting from the bottom up. Hosp MedStaff, 8(7): 7-9. 112.Marstein, E. (2003). The influence of stakeholder groupson organizational decision-making in public hospitals. Series of Dissertations 2/2003 BI Norwegian School of Management Department of Leadership and Organisational Management. Erişim: 18 Ekim 2018. http://web.bi.no/forskning/papers.nsf/0/4ee1f56d1bdc979fc12570d6004396e9/$FILE/01-03-Marstein.pdf 113.Martelli N., Lelong A., Prognan P., Pineau J. (2013). Hospital-base health technology for innovative medical devices in university hospitals and role of hospital pharmacists: learning from international experience, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 29:2 (2013), 185–191. 114.Martelli N., Billaux M., Borget I., Pineau J., Prognon P., Brink H. (2015). Introduction of Innovative Medical Devices at French University Hospitals: An Overview of Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment Initiatives, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31:1/2 (2015), Page 1 of 7. 115.Martelli, N., Devaux, C., Brink, H., Billaux, M., Pineau, J., Prognon, I. ve diğ., (2017). Harmonizing Health Technology Assessment Practices In Unıversity Hospitals: To What Extent Is The Mini-HTA Model Suitable In The French Context?International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 33:2 (2017), 307–314. 116.Martis, R., Ho, J.J., Crowther, C.A. (2008). Survey of knowledge and perception on the accessto evidence-based practice and clinical practice change among maternal and infant health practitioners in South East Asia. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2008; 8:34. 117.Mayer, M., Lauterberg J., Hunger, T., Arvandi, M., Conrads-Franka, A., Nachtnebel A. ve diğ., (2015). Health technology assessment of medical devices: What is different? An overview of three European projects. Z. Evid. Fortbild. Qual. Gesundh. Wesen (ZEFQ) (2015) 109, 309—318. 118.McGroger, M., Brophy, J.M. (2005). End-user involvement in health technology assesment (HTA) development: A way to increase inpact. International Journal of Technology Assesment in Health Care, 21:2, 263-267. 119.Mennon, D., Stafinski, T. (2009). Health Technology Assesment in Canada:20 Years Strong. Value in Health Volume 12 Supplement 2. 120.Meyer, H. (1998). ‘Focused factories’, Hospitals & Health Networks, 72, 7, 24-29. 121.Millenson, L.J., Slizewski, E. (1986). How do hospital executives spell technology assessment? “P-l-a-n-n-i-n-g.”. Health Manage Q, (1): 4-8. 122.Miniatia, R., Cecconia, G., Doria, F., Marchettia,M., Gentilia, G.B., Porchiab, B. ve diğ. (2013). Hospital-based health technology assessment on the use of mitral clips in the treatment of mitral regurgitation, Technology and Health Care 21 (2013) 535–546 535 DOI 10.3233/THC-130756 123.MUHC TAU Members (2014). The Technology Assessment Unit of The McGill University Health Centre, version 2.0. Montreal (Canada): Technology Assessment Unit (TAU) of the McGill University Health Centre (MUHC); September 4, 2014 6 pp. Erişim 07 Kasım 2017 http://www.mcgill.ca 124.Munn, R.S. (2014). Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: Insights from New Zealand, PharmacoEconomics (2014) 32:815–817. 125.Nielsen, C.P., Funch, T.M., Kristensen, F.B. (2011). Health Technology Assessment: research trends and future priorities in Europe. J Health Serv Res Policy, 16 (Suppl 2):6-15. 126.Nielsen, C.P., Lauritsen, S.W., Kristensen, F.B., Bistrup, M.L., Cecchetti, M., Turk, E. (2009). Involving stakeholders and developing a policy for stakeholder involvement in the European network for Health Technology Assessment, EUnetHTA, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25:Supplement 2 (2009), 84–91. 127.Novaes, H.M.D., Soarez, P.C. (2016). Health technology assessment (HTA) organizations: dimensions of the institutional and political framework. Cad. Saúde Pública, Rio de Janeiro, 32 Sup 2: e00022315, p.1-14. 128.NIH. (t.y.). HTA 101: II Fundamental Concepts. Erişim: 12 Temmuz 2017, https://www.nlm.nih.gov/nichsr/hta101/ta10104.html. 129.Noseworthy, T., Clement, F. (2012). Health Technology Reassessment: Scope, Methodology, & Language. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 28:3 (2012), 201–202.Cambridge University Press 2012. 130.O’Donnell J.C., Chris S.V., Pashos L., Miller D. W., Smith M.D. (2009). Health Technology Assessment: Lessons Learned from Around the World—An Overviewvhe, Value in Health, Volume 12, Suplament 2. 131.Office of Technology Assessment (1976). Development of MedicalTechnology: Opportunities for Assesment, United States Congress, USA. Erişim: 10 Ekim 2017. http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/ota/Ota_5/DATA/1976/7617.PDF 132.Office of Technology Assessment (1980). The implications of cost-effectiveness analysis of medical technology. Erişim: 21 Ekim 2017. https://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk3/1980/8011/8011.PDF 133.OECD Health Project (2005). Health Technology and Decision-Making. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2005. 134.OECD (2010a) “Health care systems: Getting more value for money”, OECD Economics Department Policy Notes, No. 2. 135.OECD (2010b). A Health Policy Studies: Value for Money in Health Spending. OECD publications. 136.OECD (2017). Health at a Glance 2017: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris. Erişim: 27 Mart 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/health_glance-2017-en 137.Olberg, B., Fuchs, S., Pantelli, D., Perleth M., Busse R. (2017). Scientific Evidencein Health Technology Assessment Reports:An In Depth Analysis of European Assessmentson High-Risk Medical Devices, Value in Healt, 1 (2007), p.1-7. 138.Oliver, A., Mossialos, E., Robinson, R. (2004). Health technology assessment and its influence on health-care priority setting. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 20(1): 1-10. 139.Olholm, A.M., Kidholm, K., Birk-Olsen M., Christensen, J.B. (2015). Hospital Managers’ Need for Information on Health Technology Investments. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 31:6 (2015), 414–425. 140.Olmen, J., Criel, B., Damme, W., Marchal, B., Belle, S. Dormael, M. ve diğ. (2010). Analysing Health Systems to Make Them Stronger. Studies in Health Services Organisation & Policy, 27, ITG Press, Nationalestraat 155, B-2000 Antwerp, Belgium. 141.Oortwijn, W., Determann, D., Schiffers, K., Tan, S., Tuin, J. (2017). Towards Integrated Health Technology Assessment for Improwing Decision Making Selected Countries. Value in Health 20(2017) 1121-1130. 142.Ormstad, S.S., Graff, B.A., Norderhaug, N. (2010). Survey and Discussion of Existing Mini-HTA Systems Internationally. Report from Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services (NOKC) No. 01-2010. Erişim:24 Ekim 2017, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK482057/. 143.Parvizi, N., Woods, K. (2014). Regulation of medicines and medical devices: Contrasts and Similarities. Clin Med. 2014; 14:6-12. 144.Pereira, C.C.A., Rabello, S.T., Elias , F.T.S. (2017). Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment In Brazil: An Overvıew Of The Inıtıal Experıences, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 33:2 (2017), 227–231. 145.Perry, S., Thamer, M. (1997). Health technology assessment: decentralized and fragmented in the US compared to other countries, Health Policy 42 (1997) 269–290 146.Petherick, E.S., Villanueva, E.V., Dumville J, Bryan E.J., Dharmage S. (2007). An evaluation of methods used in health technology assessments produced for the Medical Services Advisory Committee. MJA 187(5): 289-292. 147.Poder, P.G., Bellemare, C.A., Bedard, S.K., Fisette, J.F., Dagenais, P. (2018). Impact Of Health Technology Assessment Reports On Hospital Decısıon Makers – 10-Year Insight From A Hospital Unit In Sherbrooke, Canada: Impact Of Health Technology Assessment On Hospital Decisions. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 34:4 (2018), 1–7. 148.Poulin, P., Austen, L., Kortbeek, J.B., Lafrenière, R. (2012). New Technologies and Surgical Innovation: Five Years of a Local Health Technology Assessment Program in a Surgical Department Surgical Innovation 19(2) 187–199. 149.Quinones, M.A., Ford, J.K., Teachout, M.S. (2001). The Relationship Between Work Experience and Job Performance: A Conceptual and Meta-Analytic Review, Air Force Research Laboratory Human Effectıveness Dırectorate Warfıghter Traınıng Research Dıvısıon. Erişim: 18 Kasım 2018, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235014459. 150.Rashiq, S., Barton P., Harstall, C., Schopflocher, D., Taenzer, P., the Alberta Ambassador Program Team (2006). The Alberta Ambassador Program: delivering Health Technology Assessment results to rural practitioners, BMC Medical Education 2006, 6:21, p.1-6. 151.Rechel, B., Doyle, Y., Grundy, E., McKee, M. (2009). How can health systems respond to population ageing? World Health Organization 2009 and World HealthOrganization, on behalf of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies. 152.Ritrovato M., Faggiano, F., Tedesco G., Derrico P. (2015). Decision-Oriented Health Technology Assessment: One Step Forward in Supporting the Decision-Making Processin Hospitals. Value in Health 18 (2015) 505-511. 153.Romanow, R.J. (2003). Building on values. The future of health care in Canada.Ottawa:HealthCanada;2003:8385.Erişim:18Temmuz2017,www.hcsc.gc.ca/english/pdf/romanow/pdfs/HCC Final Report.pdf 154.Rosenstein, A.H., O’Daniel, M., Geoghan, K. (2003). Assessing New technology: how are other hospitals facing the challenge? Healthc Financ Manage 2003,57:70–74. 155.Ryan, M., Moran P.S., Harrington, P., Murphy L., O'Neil, M., Whelan M., ve Teljeur, C. (2017). Contribution Of Stakeholder Engagement To The Impact Of A Health Technology Assessment: An Irish Case Study. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(4):424-429. 156.Saaid, H.B., Donald, S., Ian, E., Nilesh, P. (2011). The impact of health technology assessment on decision-making processes in public versus not-for-profit private hospitals. Am J Med. 2011;2(2):72–8. 157.Sackett, D.L., Rosenberg, W.M., Gray, J.A., Haynes R.B., Richardson W.S., (1996). Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn’t. BMJ. 1996; 312:71-2. 158.Sağlık Araştırmaları Genel Müdürlüğü (t.y.). Erişim: 25 Eylül 2017. http://hta.gov.tr/ 159.Sağlık Bakanlığı (2010). Sağlık Bölge Planlaması Hakkında Genelge ile Hastane Yatak ve Rolleri Tescil Onayı 2010/50. Erişim: 15 Ocak 2017. http://www.saglik.gov.tr/TR,11024/saglik-bolge-planlamasi-hakkinda-genelge ile-hastane-yatak-ve-rolleri-tescil-onayi-201050.html 160.Sağlık Bakanlığı (2012). 2013-2017 Stratejik Plan. Erişim:18 Ekim 2017. http://pydb.saglik.gov.tr/documents/stratejik%20plan%202013-2017.pdf 161.Sağlık Bilimleri Üniversitesi (2015). Erişim: 12 Aralık 2018, https://www.sbu.edu.tr/tr/universitemiz/kurumsal-bilgilerimiz/genel-bilgiler 162.Sampietro-Colom, L., Asua, J., Briones, E., Gol, J. (2009). History of health technology assessment: Spain. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25: Supplement 1 (2009), 163–173. 163.Sampietro-Colom, L., Lach K., Cicchetti, A., Kidholm, K., Pasternack, I., Fure, B. ve diğ. (2015). The AdHopHTA handbook: a handbook of hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA); Public deliverable, The AdHopHTA Project (FP7/2007-13 grantagreement nr 305018), Erişim: 25 Nisan 2017, http://www.dhophta.eu/handbook. 164.Sampietro-Colom, L., Martin, J. (2016). Hospital-Based Health Technology Assessment: The Next Frontier for Health Technology Assessment, Springer, New York. 165.Schmidt, F.L., Outerbridge, A.N., Hunter, J.E. (1988). Joint Relation of Experience and Ability With Job Performance: Test of Three Hypotheses Journal of Applied Psychology, 1988, Vol. 73, No. 1,46-57. 166.Schnell-Inderst, P., Mayer, J., Lauterberg, J., Hunger, T., Arvandi, M. ve diğ. (2015). Health technology assessment of medical devices: What is different? An overview of three European projects. Z Evid Fortbild Qual Gesundhwes. 2015;109(4-5):309-18. 167.Schneider J. E., Miller, T. R., Ohsfeldt R. L., Morrisey, M.A., Zelner, B. A., Li, P. (2008). The Economics of Specialty Hospitals. Medical Care Research and Review, June 2. 168.Siddiqui Z.K., Wu A.W., Kurbanova, N., Qayyum, R. (2014). Comparison of Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems patient satisfaction cores for specialty hospitals and general medical hospitals: confounding effect of survey response rate. J Hosp Med. 2014 Sep;9(9):590-3. doi: 10.1002/jhm.2225. Epub 2014 Jun 19. 169.Sproten, A., Diener, C., Fiebach, C., Schwieren, C. (2010). Aging and decision making: How aging affects decisions under uncertainty? University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics, Discussion Paper Series No. 508. 170.Stevens. A., Milne, R. (2004). Health technology assessment in England and Wales. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2004; 20:11-24. 171.Stoklosa, A. (2013). The Concept of Evidence in Health Technology Assessment (HTA). PhD. Dissertation. Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology University of Toronto, Canada. 172.Swedish Agency For Health Technology Assessment And Assessment Of Social Services (t.y). Erişim: 11 Ekim 2017, http://www.sbu.se/en/about-sbu/publications-and-communication/ 173.Tarricone R., Torbice, A., Drummond, M. (2017). Key Recommendatıons From The Medtechta Project. Health Economics 26(Suppl. 1): 145–152. 174.T.C. Anayasası (1982). Kanun No:2709, 9/11/1982 tarihli ve 17863 mükerrer sayılı Resmî Gazete. 175.Teerawattananon Y., Tantivess S., Yothasamut J., Kingkaew P., Chaisiri, K. (2009). Historical development of health technology assessment in Thailand. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25: Supplement 1 (2009), 241–252. 2009 Cambridge University Press. U.S.A. 176.Türk Dil Kurumu Sözlüğü (t.y.). Erişim: 22 Mayıs 2017, http://www.tdk.gov.tr/ 177.Uphoff, M.E., Krane D. (1998). Hospital-Based Technology Assessment: Essential Questions and an Operational Model, Public Productivity & Management Review, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Sep., 1998), pp. 60-70, Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 178.Uppal, N., Mishra, S.K., Vohra, N. (2014). Prior related work experience and job performance: Role of personality. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22(1), 39-51. doi: 10.1111/ijsa. 179.Wahlster, P., Brereton, L., Burns, J., Hofmann, B., Mozygemba, K., Oortwijn, W. ve diğ. (2017). An Integrated Perspective On The Assessment Of Technologıes: Integrate-HTA, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 33:5 (2017), 544–551. 180.Wild, C. (2009). Austria: History of health technology assessment during the past 20 years. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 25: Supplement 1 (2009), 74–81. 181.Wilson, C.B. (1999). The impact of medical technologies on the future of hospitals, BMJ. 1999 Nov 13; 319(7220): 1287. 182.WHO (2000a). The World health report 2000: health systems: improving performance. Geneva, World Health Organization;2000, ISBN 924156198X, 215 pages, SFr 15. 183.WHO (2000b). Institutionalization of Health Technology Assessment, Report on a WHO Meeting Bonn 30 June ñ 1 July 2000. Erişim, 02 Şubat 2018, http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/120247/E72364.pdf 184.WHO (2002). Sağlık ve İnsan Hakları Üzerine 25 Soru-26 Cevap, Toplum Sağlığı Araştırma ve Geliştirme Merkezi, Erişim, 31 Haziran 2017, www. who.int. 185.WHO (2011). Health Technology of Medical Devices. WHO Medical Device Series. WHO Press, 20 Avenue Appia, 1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland. 186.WHO (2015). Global Survey on Health Technology Assessment by National Authorities. Printed by the WHO Document Production Services, Geneva, Switzerland. 187.WHO (2016). Strategizing national health in the 21st century: a handbook. Schmets G, Rajan D, Kadandale S, editors. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2016. 188.WHO (t.y.). History, Erişim:14 Mayıs 2017, http://www.who.int/medical_devices/assessment/history.pdf 189.Vestergaard, M., Ehlers, L., Kidholm, K., Pedersen, PH., Copenhagen Hospital Corporation, Bispebjerg Hospital (2005). Introduction to mini-HTA: A management and decision support tool for the hospital service. A Project by the National Board of Health, Danish Centre for Evaluation and Health Technology Assessment. P.1-38. 190.Yaşlıoğlu, M.M. (2017). Sosyal Bilimlerde Faktör Analizi ve Geçerlilik: Keşfedici ve Doğrulayıcı Faktör Analizlerinin Kullanılması, İstanbul Üniversitesi İşletme Fakültesi Dergisi Vol/Cilt: 46, Special Issue/Özel Sayı 2017, 74-85 ISSN: 1303-1732 – http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/iuisletmetr_TR
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11655/6898
dc.description.abstractThe Health Technology Assessment (HTA) method, is one of the tools frequently applied in the decisions related to the acquisition of health technologies. The adaptation of HTA to hospitals is the Hospital Based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA) method. HTA method has been carried out at the since 2012 in Turkey. But, there is insufficient information on the use of HB-HTA in hospitals. Although the name was not known as HB-HTA in hospitals, several assessment models supporting the decision process are used when acquisition of a medical device or equipment. The aim of this study is to investigate how public and private hospitals benefit the HB-HTA method in the stage of acquiring medical device/equipment, what are the personal and institutional characteristics affecting the use of HB-HTA and how they affect it. In the study, the questionnaire, was developed as the data collection tool, a total of 186 managers from 33 hospitals, 24 of which were Ministry of Health and 9 private hospitals, were reached. The analysis reveals that the evaluation methods applied in the stage of acquiring a medical device/equipment in hospitals were similar to those used in HB-HTA methods and the dimensions of HB-HTA were taken into consideration. The multidisciplinary structure, which is one of the important features of the method is utilized in the assessments and preferred by the managers. It has been revealed that all the managers emphasizes various scales and dimensions of the method such as private hospitals to all dimensions of HB-HTA; branch hospitals to safety; teaching hospitals and all managers to clinical effectiveness; financial services managers and assistants to costs and economic evaluation as well as strategic and political aspects. In addition, HB-HTA method has been found to be affected positively by age variable. However, it has been observed that there is no systematic structure designed and deployed at the national level regarding the use and dissemination of HB-HTA. This study uncovers the current use of HB-HTA methods and applications in hospitals and shows that the development of HB-HTA method throughout the country should be supported at all levels of health system.tr_TR
dc.description.tableofcontentsİÇİNDEKİLER KABUL VE ONAY i YAYIMLAMA VE FİKRİ MÜLKİYET HAKLARI BEYANI ii ETİK BEYAN iii TEŞEKKÜR iv ÖZET v ABSTRACT vi İÇİNDEKİLER vii KISALTMALAR DİZİNİ x TABLOLAR DİZİNİ xi ŞEKİLLER DİZİNİ xiv EKLER xv GİRİŞ 1 1.BÖLÜM: SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNTEMİ 6 1.1.TEKNOLOJİ VE SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ 6 1.2. SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNTEMİ 10 1.2.1. Sağlık Problemi ve Teknolojinin Mevcut Kullanımı 12 1.2.2. Teknolojinin Tanımı ve Teknik Özellikleri 12 1.2.3. Güvenlik Boyutu 12 1.2.4. Klinik Etkililik Boyutu 13 1.2.5. Maliyetler ve Ekonomik Değerlendirme Boyutu 13 1.2.6. Etik Analiz Boyutu 14 1.2.7. Organizasyonel Yönler Boyutu 14 1.2.8. Hastalar ve Sosyal Yönler Boyutu 15 1.2.9. Yasal Yönler Boyutu 15 1.3. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Süreci 15 1.4. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Uygulamalarında İlaç ve Tıbbi Cihaz Arasındaki Farklılıklar 21 1.5. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme ve Sağlık Politikası 22 1.6. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme, Kanıta Dayalı Tıp ve Karşılaştırmalı Etkililik Araştırması Arasındaki Farklılıklar 26 2. BÖLÜM: HASTANE TABANLI SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNTEMİ 29 2.1. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme ve Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Yöntemlerinin Farkı 32 2.2. Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Sürecinde Hastane Yöneticilerinin Bilgi İhtiyacı 47 2.3.Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Uygulamalarının Etkinliğini Arttıracak Faktörler 52 2.4. Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Sonuçlarının Diğer Hastanelere Transferi 54 3. BÖLÜM: SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ DEĞERLENDİRME VE HASTANE TABANLI SAĞLIK TEKNOLOJİSİ DEĞERLENDİRME YÖNTEMLERİNİN GELİŞİMİ 56 3.1. Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Yönteminin Gelişimi 56 3.2. Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Yönteminin Gelişimi 60 3.3. Türkiye’de Ulusal Ve Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknoloji Değerlendirme Yöntemlerinin Gelişimi 64 3.4. Türkiye’de Sağlık Tesislerinde Tıbbi Cihaz ile İlgili Uygulamalar 68 4. BÖLÜM: GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM 70 4.1. Araştırmanın Amacı ve Kapsamı 70 4.2. Problem Cümlesi ve Hipotezler 71 4.3. Evren ve Örneklem 72 4.4. Veri Toplama Aracı 74 4.5. Veri Toplama Aracının (Anketin) Uygulaması 77 4.6. Verilerin Analizi 77 4.7. Soru Kağıdının Geçerlilik ve Güvenirliği 81 4.8. Kısıtlılıklar 90 5. BÖLÜM: BULGULAR 91 5.1 Tanımlayıcı Bulgular 91 5.1.1. Bağımsız Değişkenlerle İlgili Tanımlayıcı Bulgular 91 5.1.2. Bağımlı Değişkenlerle İlgili Tanımlayıcı Bulgular 100 5.2. Hipotezlere İlişkin Bulgular 108 6. BÖLÜM: TARTIŞMA 124 7. BÖLÜM: SONUÇ ve ÖNERİLER 140 KAYNAKÇA 148 EKLER 168tr_TR
dc.language.isoturtr_TR
dc.publisherSosyal Bilimler Enstitüsütr_TR
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesstr_TR
dc.subjectSağlık teknolojisi değerlendirme
dc.subjectHastane tabanlı sağlık teknolojisi değerlendirme
dc.subjectHastane
dc.subjectTıbbi cihaz
dc.subjectTıbbi ekipman
dc.subjectSağlık politikası
dc.subjectSağlık ekonomisi
dc.titleHastane Yöneticilerinin Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme Yöntemine İlişkin Görüşlerinin Değerlendirilmesitr_TR
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesistr_TR
dc.description.ozetSağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme (STD) yöntemi, sağlık teknolojilerinin edinimi ile ilgili kararlarda sıklıkla başvurulan araçlardan biridir. STD’nin hastanelere uyarlanmış hali ise Hastane Tabanlı Sağlık Teknolojisi Değerlendirme (HT-STD) yöntemidir. Türkiye’de de 2012 yılından itibaren STD ile ilgili faaliyetler yürütülmektedir. Hastanelerde ise HT-STD’nin kullanımı ile ilgili yeterince bilgi mevcut değildir. Ancak hastanelerde adı her ne kadar HT-STD olarak tanımlanmasa da bir tıbbi cihaz ve ekipman edinilirken karar sürecine destek olan değerlendirme modellerinin kullanıldığı bilinmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı, kamu ve özel hastanelerin tıbbi cihaz ekipman edinme aşamasında, HT-STD yönteminden ne düzeyde yararlandıkları, HT-STD kullanımını etkileyen kişisel ve kurumsal özelliklerin neler olduğunu ve kullanım düzeyini nasıl etkilediklerini araştırmaktır. Araştırmada, veri toplama aracı olarak geliştirilen soru kâğıdının geçerlilik ve güvenilirlik çalışmaları yapılarak, 24’ü Sağlık Bakanlığı ve 9’u özel hastane olmak üzere toplam 33 hastaneden 186 yöneticiyle görüşülmüştür. Analizler sonucunda, hastanelerde bir tıbbi cihaz/ekipman edinme aşamasında HT-STD yönteminden yararlanıldığı ve HT-STD’nin boyutlarının dikkate alındığı görülmüştür. Yöntemin önemli özelliklerinden biri olan multidisipliner yapı, değerlendirmelerde kullanılmakta, yöneticiler tarafından da tercih edilmektedir. Özel hastanelerin HT-STD’nin tüm boyutlarına, branş hastanelerinin güvenlik boyutuna, eğitim hastanelerinin ise klinik etkililik boyutuna daha fazla önem verdikleri görülmüştür. Tüm yöneticilerin klinik etkililik boyutuna, idari ve mali hizmetler müdür ve yardımcılarının ise maliyetler ve ekonomik değerlendirme boyutu ile stratejik bakış açısı ve politik yönler boyutlarına daha fazla önem verdikleri ve yöneticilerin yaşı arttıkça HT-STD yöntemine karar verme sürecinde çok daha fazla yer verdikleri bulunmuştur. Bununla birlikte, HT-STD’nin kullanımı ve yaygınlaştırılması ile ilgili ulusal düzeyde tasarlanmış sistematik bir yapının olmadığı da görülmüştür. Bu çalışma, hastanelerde HT-STD yöntem ve uygulamalarının varlığını ortaya koymanın yanında, ülke genelinde HT-STD yönteminin gelişiminin sağlık sisteminin her düzeyinde desteklenmesi gerektiğini ortaya koymaktadır.tr_TR
dc.contributor.departmentSağlık Yönetimitr_TR
dc.embargo.terms6 aytr_TR
dc.embargo.lift2019-11-02T06:26:45Z


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Ad:
10245315.pdf
Boyut:
2.935Mb
Biçim:
PDF
Açıklama:
Doktora Tezi
Göster/Aç

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster