Establishment of a Quantitative Medical Technology Evaluation System and Indicators within Medical Institutions  

作　　者：Suo-Wei Wu Tong Chen Qi Pan Liang-Yu Wei Qin Wang Chao Li Jing-Chen Song Ji Luo 

机构地区：[1]Department of Medical Administration, Beijing Hospital, National Center of Gerontology, Beijing 100730, China

出　　处：《Chinese Medical Journal》2018年第11期1327-1332,共6页中华医学杂志（英文版）

摘　　要：Background： The development and application of medical technologies reflect the medical quality and clinical capacity of a hospital. It is also an effective approach in upgrading medical service and core competitiveness among medical institutions. This study aimed to build a quantitative medical technology evaluation system through questionnaire survey within medical institutions to perforna an assessment to medical technologies more objectively and accurately, and promote the management of medical quality technologies and ensure the medical safety of various operations among the hospitals. Methods： A two-leveled quantitative medical technology evaluation system was built through a two-round questionnaire survey of chosen experts. The Delphi method was applied in identifying the structure of evaluation system and indicators. The judgment of the experts on the indicators was adopted in building the matrix so that the weight coefficient and maximum eigenvalue （λ. max）, consistency index （CI）, and random consistency ratio （CR） could be obtained and collected. The results were verified through consistency tests, and the index weight coefficient of each indicator was conducted and calculated through analytical hierarchy process. Results： Twenty-six experts of different medical fields were involved in the questionnaire survey, 25 of whom successfully responded to the two-round research. Altogether, 4 primary indicators （safety, effectiveness, innovativeness, and benefits）, as well as 13 secondary indicators, were included in the evaluation system. The matrix is built to conduct the λ max, CI, and CR of each expert in the survey, and the index weight coefficients of primary indicators were 0.33, 0.28, 0.27, and 0.12, respectively, and the index weight coefficients of secondary indicators were conducted and calculated accordingly. Conclusions： As the two-round questionnaire survey of experts and statistical analysis were performed and credibility of the results was verified through consistency eBackground： The development and application of medical technologies reflect the medical quality and clinical capacity of a hospital. It is also an effective approach in upgrading medical service and core competitiveness among medical institutions. This study aimed to build a quantitative medical technology evaluation system through questionnaire survey within medical institutions to perforna an assessment to medical technologies more objectively and accurately, and promote the management of medical quality technologies and ensure the medical safety of various operations among the hospitals. Methods： A two-leveled quantitative medical technology evaluation system was built through a two-round questionnaire survey of chosen experts. The Delphi method was applied in identifying the structure of evaluation system and indicators. The judgment of the experts on the indicators was adopted in building the matrix so that the weight coefficient and maximum eigenvalue （λ. max）, consistency index （CI）, and random consistency ratio （CR） could be obtained and collected. The results were verified through consistency tests, and the index weight coefficient of each indicator was conducted and calculated through analytical hierarchy process. Results： Twenty-six experts of different medical fields were involved in the questionnaire survey, 25 of whom successfully responded to the two-round research. Altogether, 4 primary indicators （safety, effectiveness, innovativeness, and benefits）, as well as 13 secondary indicators, were included in the evaluation system. The matrix is built to conduct the λ max, CI, and CR of each expert in the survey, and the index weight coefficients of primary indicators were 0.33, 0.28, 0.27, and 0.12, respectively, and the index weight coefficients of secondary indicators were conducted and calculated accordingly. Conclusions： As the two-round questionnaire survey of experts and statistical analysis were performed and credibility of the results was verified through consistency e

关 键 词：Evaluation System Medical Management Medical Technology 

分 类 号：R197.32[医药卫生—卫生事业管理]