IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v102y2011i2p152-158.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Introduction and uptake of new medical technologies in the Australian health care system: A qualitative study

Author

Listed:
  • Gallego, Gisselle
  • Casey, Robert
  • Norman, Richard
  • Goodall, Stephen

Abstract

The aim of this study was to explore the views and perceptions of stakeholders about the current national health technology assessment process conducted by the Medical Services Advisory Committee (MSAC) and its role in the uptake and diffusion of new medical technologies in Australia.

Suggested Citation

  • Gallego, Gisselle & Casey, Robert & Norman, Richard & Goodall, Stephen, 2011. "Introduction and uptake of new medical technologies in the Australian health care system: A qualitative study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 152-158.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:102:y:2011:i:2:p:152-158
    DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.04.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851011000698
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.healthpol.2011.04.003?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stirling Bryan, 2008. "Darzi on NICE: the case for clinician engagement in HTA," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1323-1327.
    2. Productivity Commission, 2005. "Impacts of Advances in Medical Technology in Australia," Research Reports, Productivity Commission, Government of Australia, number 17.
    3. Stirling Bryan, 2008. "Darzi on NICE: the case for clinician engagement in HTA," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(12), pages 1323-1327, December.
    4. Schreyögg, Jonas & Bäumler, Michael & Busse, Reinhard, 2009. "Balancing adoption and affordability of medical devices in Europe," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(2-3), pages 218-224, October.
    5. Steven Simoens, 2009. "Which barriers prevent the efficient use of resources in medical device sectors?," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 209-217, December.
    6. McMahon, Meghan & Morgan, Steve & Mitton, Craig, 2006. "The Common Drug Review: A NICE start for Canada?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(3), pages 339-351, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sellars, Marcus & Carter, Stacy M. & Lancsar, Emily & Howard, Kirsten & Coast, Joanna, 2024. "Making recommendations to subsidize new health technologies in Australia: A qualitative study of decision-makers’ perspectives on committee processes," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    2. Addo, Rebecca & Hall, Jane & Haas, Marion & Goodall, Stephen, 2020. "The knowledge and attitude of Ghanaian decision-makers and researchers towards health technology assessment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 250(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fischer, Katharina E. & Rogowski, Wolf H. & Leidl, Reiner & Stollenwerk, Björn, 2013. "Transparency vs. closed-door policy: Do process characteristics have an impact on the outcomes of coverage decisions? A statistical analysis," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(3), pages 187-196.
    2. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2014. "Has Medical Innovation Reduced Cancer Mortality?," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 60(1), pages 135-177.
    3. Colombier, Carsten & Weber, Werner, 2009. "Projecting health-care expenditure for Switzerland: further evidence against the 'red-herring' hypothesis," MPRA Paper 26747, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Nov 2009.
    4. Bonny Parkinson, 2013. "Pharmaceutical policy in Australia. CHERE Working Paper 2013/01," Working Papers 2013/01, CHERE, University of Technology, Sydney.
    5. Rachet-Jacquet, Laurie & Toulemon, Léa & Rochaix, Lise, 2021. "Hospital payment schemes and high-priced drugs: Evidence from the French Add-on List," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(7), pages 923-929.
    6. Sorenson, Corinna & Kanavos, Panos, 2011. "Medical technology procurement in Europe: A cross-country comparison of current practice and policy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 43-50, April.
    7. Lichtenberg, Frank R. & Tatar, Mehtap & Çalışkan, Zafer, 2014. "The effect of pharmaceutical innovation on longevity, hospitalization and medical expenditure in Turkey, 1999–2010," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(3), pages 361-373.
    8. Henschke, Cornelia, 2012. "Provision and financing of assistive technology devices in Germany: A bureaucratic odyssey? The case of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Duchenne muscular dystrophy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(2), pages 176-184.
    9. Bergh, Andreas, 2016. "The Future of Welfare Services: How Worried Should We Be about Wagner, Baumol and Ageing?," Working Paper Series 1109, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    10. Wydra, Sven, 2015. "Challenges for technology diffusion policy to achieve socio-economic goals," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 76-90.
    11. Jennifer Whitty & Paul Scuffham & Sharyn Rundle-Thielee, 2011. "Public and decision maker stated preferences for pharmaceutical subsidy decisions," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 73-79, March.
    12. Zippel, Claus & Bohnet-Joschko, Sabine, 2017. "Post market surveillance in the german medical device sector – current state and future perspectives," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(8), pages 880-886.
    13. Morris, Zoë Slote & Clarkson, Peter John, 2009. "Does social marketing provide a framework for changing healthcare practice?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 135-141, July.
    14. Astolfi, Roberto & Lorenzoni, Luca & Oderkirk, Jillian, 2012. "Informing policy makers about future health spending: A comparative analysis of forecasting methods in OECD countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(1), pages 1-10.
    15. Colombier, Carsten, 2012. "Healthcare expenditure projections up to 2060," MPRA Paper 104919, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Armstrong, Kristy & Mitton, Craig & Carleton, Bruce & Shoveller, Jean, 2008. "Drug formulary decision-making in two regional health authorities in British Columbia, Canada," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(2-3), pages 308-316, December.
    17. Gallego, Gisselle & Taylor, Susan Joyce & Brien, Jo-anne Elizabeth, 2009. "Funding and access to high cost medicines in public hospitals in Australia: Decision-makers' perspectives," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 27-34, September.
    18. Martelli, Nicolas & van den Brink, Hélène, 2014. "Special funding schemes for innovative medical devices in French hospitals: The pros and cons of two different approaches," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 117(1), pages 1-5.
    19. Maximilian H. M. Hatz & Jonas Schreyögg & Aleksandra Torbica & Giuseppe Boriani & Carl R. B. Blankart, 2017. "Adoption Decisions for Medical Devices in the Field of Cardiology: Results from a European Survey," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(S1), pages 124-144, February.
    20. Frank R. Lichtenberg, 2015. "Pharmaceutical Innovation, Longevity, and Medical Expenditure in Greece, 1995-2010," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 277-299, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:102:y:2011:i:2:p:152-158. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu or the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/healthpol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.