000071182 001__ 71182
000071182 005__ 20200113145619.0
000071182 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1002/phar.2144
000071182 0248_ $$2sideral$$a106893
000071182 037__ $$aART-2018-106893
000071182 041__ $$aeng
000071182 100__ $$0(orcid)0000-0001-9962-3387$$aFrutos Pérez-Surio, Alberto$$uUniversidad de Zaragoza
000071182 245__ $$aSystematic review for development of a medicinal products and medical devices prioritization framework
000071182 260__ $$c2018
000071182 5060_ $$aAccess copy available to the general public$$fUnrestricted
000071182 5203_ $$aBACKGROUND: The purpose of the research question is to develop an explicit priority setting methodology to support decision-making regarding Medicinal Products and Medical Devices to be included in hospital pharmacy practice. The development of a comprehensive prioritization system is the outcome essential for an important benefit to the healthcare system. The aim of this paper is to identify and analyze the processes and decision criteria used internationally for priority setting in order to establish a comprehensive set of strategic criteria for starting point for the development of a Medicinal Products and Medical Devices prioritization framework.
METHODS: A systematic search of the literature was carried out in December 2017, in the main biomedical electronic databases: Medline/PubMed, Embase, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD), and Cochrane. Eligibility criteria for inclusion were based on set of predefined criteria.
Systematic reviews and/or qualitative studies (interviews, surveys, expert consensus, etc) that aimed to identify prioritization criteria or develop general operational frameworks for the selection of health priorities were included. Data of the studies were analyzed and synthesized qualitatively.
RESULTS: A total of 17 documents complied with eligibility criteria, 15 were published in scientific journals and 2 were identified through web pages. The studies showed great heterogeneity. A total of 56 potentially relevant priority setting criteria were identified, which could be grouped in 8 categories: 1) Need for intervention; 2) Outcomes of intervention; 3) Type of benefit; 4) Economic consequences; 5) Existing knowledge/quality of evidence and uncertainties; 6) Implementation complexity/feasibility; 7) Priority, justice and equity; and 8) Context.
DISCUSSION: There are no standardized processes for priority setting, despite the fact some general consensus and common trends have been identified regarding criteria, models and strategies, and key actors. This research provides a thorough analysis of these approaches and offers recommendations for implementing successful prioritization approaches.
000071182 540__ $$9info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess$$aAll rights reserved$$uhttp://www.europeana.eu/rights/rr-f/
000071182 590__ $$a3.045$$b2018
000071182 591__ $$aPHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY$$b97 / 266 = 0.365$$c2018$$dQ2$$eT2
000071182 592__ $$a1.156$$b2018
000071182 593__ $$aPharmacology (medical)$$c2018$$dQ1
000071182 655_4 $$ainfo:eu-repo/semantics/conferenceObject$$vinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
000071182 700__ $$aGimeno Gracia, Mercedes
000071182 700__ $$aAlcácera López, María Aránzazu
000071182 700__ $$aSagredo Samanes, María Asunción
000071182 700__ $$aPardo Jario, María del Puerto
000071182 700__ $$aSalvador Gómez, María del Tránsito
000071182 7102_ $$11008$$2615$$aUniversidad de Zaragoza$$bDpto. Microb.Med.Pr.,Sal.Públ.$$cÁrea Medic.Prevent.Salud Públ.
000071182 773__ $$g38, 7 (2018), e77$$pPharmacotherapy$$tPHARMACOTHERAPY$$x0277-0008
000071182 8564_ $$s73158$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/71182/files/texto_completo.pdf$$yVersión publicada
000071182 8564_ $$s120786$$uhttps://zaguan.unizar.es/record/71182/files/texto_completo.jpg?subformat=icon$$xicon$$yVersión publicada
000071182 909CO $$ooai:zaguan.unizar.es:71182$$particulos$$pdriver
000071182 951__ $$a2020-01-13-14:54:37
000071182 980__ $$aARTICLE