IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/hepoli/v98y2010i2-3p218-226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Guiding the process of health technology disinvestment

Author

Listed:
  • Ibargoyen-Roteta, Nora
  • Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea, Iñaki
  • Asua, José

Abstract

Objectives To develop a guideline for health technology disinvestment.Methods The Nominal Group Technique was used to determine relevant aspects of disinvestment decision-making. Ideas reaching consensus and previous Spanish guidelines on the acquisition of new health technologies (GANT) and new genetic tests (GEN) structures were used to develop the domains and contents of GuNFT (Guideline for Not Funding Health Technologies). The draft was peer reviewed by local and international experts and their suggestions were incorporated to the first GuNFT version.Results Thirty-five ideas reached consensus. The most relevant ones referred to the reasons for disinvesting in a technology and the key aspects that would facilitate disinvestment acceptance. Considering both consensus ideas and GANT and GEN guidelines, the first GuNFT draft was elaborated. After the review process, section numbers and contents were changed. The resulting GuNFT guideline was finally divided into six domains related to: (1) general preliminary recommendations, (2) completing the application form, (3) checking and prioritising applications, (4) assessment, (5) final decision and (6) action plan design. A software was also developed to facilitate GuNFT implementation.Conclusions Disinvestment should be a guided process. Accordingly, we present the first guideline for that purpose.

Suggested Citation

  • Ibargoyen-Roteta, Nora & Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea, Iñaki & Asua, José, 2010. "Guiding the process of health technology disinvestment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 98(2-3), pages 218-226, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:hepoli:v:98:y:2010:i:2-3:p:218-226
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168-8510(10)00177-6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Jonathan Karnon & Jill Carlton & Carolyn Czoski-Murray & Kevin Smith, 2009. "Informing disinvestment through cost-effectiveness modelling," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, March.
    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. Hofmann, Bjørn, 2020. "Biases distorting priority setting," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(1), pages 52-60.
    2. Rooshenas, Leila & Owen-Smith, Amanda & Hollingworth, William & Badrinath, Padmanabhan & Beynon, Claire & Donovan, Jenny L., 2015. "“I won't call it rationing…”: An ethnographic study of healthcare disinvestment in theory and practice," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 273-281.
    3. García-Armesto, Sandra & Campillo-Artero, Carlos & Bernal-Delgado, Enrique, 2013. "Disinvestment in the age of cost-cutting sound and fury. Tools for the Spanish National Health System," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 180-185.

    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. Tania Stafinski & Devidas Menon & Deborah Marshall & Timothy Caulfield, 2011. "Societal Values in the Allocation of Healthcare Resources," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 4(4), pages 207-225, December.

    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:98:y:2010:i:2-3:p:218-226. 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.