Subscribe: pubmed: "International journ...
http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/erss.cgi?rss_guid=04iujwW3mbOmXqwOTG60NcqodJb8C-l2AhFyLt5zwHn
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade B rated
Language: English
Tags:
accreditation  assessment  health care  health  hta impact  hta  impact story  impact  inahta  legislative  office based  office  story 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: pubmed: "International journ...

pubmed: "International journ...



NCBI: db=pubmed; Term=("International journal of technology assessment in health care"[Jour])



 



INSIGHTS FROM THE FRONT LINES: A COLLECTION OF STORIES OF HTA IMPACT FROM INAHTA MEMBER AGENCIES.
Related Articles

INSIGHTS FROM THE FRONT LINES: A COLLECTION OF STORIES OF HTA IMPACT FROM INAHTA MEMBER AGENCIES.

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(4):409-410

Authors: Schuller T, Söderholm Werkö S

Abstract
This mini-theme contains six stories of health technology assessment (HTA) impact from member agencies of The International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA), which were originally shared at the 2015 and 2016 INAHTA Congresses. The INAHTA impact story sharing is an innovative network activity where member agency representatives share experiences of HTA impact in a loosely structured story format. Through this process, members gain insights from other agencies on new ways of thinking about and approaching HTA impact assessment. A guide is provided to members to prepare their story, and the best story receives the David Hailey Award for Best Impact Story. This mini-theme contains stories of HTA impact from six member agencies in different parts of the world: the Health Assessment Division of the Ministry of Public Health (Uruguay), the Institute of Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (Germany), the Health Information and Quality Authority (Ireland), the Finnish Office for Health Technology Assessment (Finland), the Australian Safety and Efficacy Register of New Interventional Procedures-Surgical (Australia), and the Institut national d'excellence en santé et en services sociaux (Canada). Across the papers, common themes emerge about the importance of appropriate engagement of stakeholders and the broadening scope of HTA beyond reimbursement decision making.

PMID: 29241477 [PubMed - in process]




INAHTA IMPACT STORY: LEGISLATIVE AND ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE-BASED SURGERY IN AUSTRALIA.
Related Articles

INAHTA IMPACT STORY: LEGISLATIVE AND ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS FOR OFFICE-BASED SURGERY IN AUSTRALIA.

Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2017 Jan;33(4):434-441

Authors: Tivey D, Ma N, Duncan J, Atukorale Y, Lambert R, Maddern G

Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is growing trend for some surgical procedures previously performed in hospitals to be done in alternative settings, including office-based facilities. There has been some safety concerns reported in the media, which document serious adverse events following procedures performed in an office-based setting. To understand the current regulatory oversight of surgery in this setting ASERNIP-S conducted a review of the legislative and accreditation process governing these facilities in Australia.
METHODS: Using rapid review methodology, internet searches targeted government Web sites for relevant publicly-available documents. Use of consolidated versions of legislative instruments ensured currency of information. Standards were sourced directly from the issuing authorities or those that oversee the accreditation process.
RESULTS: Within Australia, healthcare facilities for surgery and their licensing are defined by each state and territory, which results in significant jurisdictional variation. These variations relate to the need for anesthesia beyond conscious sedation and listing of procedures in legislative instruments. In 2013, Australia adopted National Safety and Quality Health Service standards (NSQHS standards) for the accreditation of hospitals and day surgery centers; however, there is no NSQHS standard for office-based facilities. The main legislative driver for compliance is access to reimbursement schemes for service delivery.
CONCLUSIONS: The legislative and accreditation framework creates a situation whereby healthcare facilities that provide services outside the various legal definitions of surgery and those not covered by a reimbursement scheme, can operate without licensing and accreditation oversight. This situation exposes patients to potential increased risk of harm when receiving treatment in such unregulated facilities.

PMID: 29241476 [PubMed - in process]