中国植入式医疗器械评估的多利益相关者多准则决策分析。

IF 2.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Frontiers in health services Pub Date : 2025-08-29 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/frhs.2025.1650709
Yizhou Xu, Junjie Wan, Bin Wan, Haixia Ding
{"title":"中国植入式医疗器械评估的多利益相关者多准则决策分析。","authors":"Yizhou Xu, Junjie Wan, Bin Wan, Haixia Ding","doi":"10.3389/frhs.2025.1650709","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to develop a standardized multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework tailored for implantable medical devices in China, addressing the challenges of inconsistent evaluation processes under China's evolving healthcare financing policies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods design combining a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and MCDA was employed. Six criteria (clinical effectiveness, clinical safety, innovation, disease severity, implementation capacity, and cost) were identified through literature reviews and expert consultations. A DCE survey with 540 multi-stakeholder participants (decision-makers, HTA experts, clinicians, hospital administrators, and citizens) was conducted to derive criterion weights using mixed logit models. The framework was validated through a real-world case study assessing endoscopic linear staplers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinical safety (35.45%) and cost (27.94%) emerged as the most critical criteria, followed by implementation capacity (16.56%) and clinical effectiveness (15.07%). Innovation (2.54%) and disease severity (2.44%) received minimal weight. The MCDA application demonstrated high inter-rater consistency (CV < 0.25).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study proposes a transparent, stakeholder-driven framework for evaluating implantable medical devices, specifically designed to support China's healthcare policies. The framework ensures that healthcare decisions are grounded in clinical effectiveness, safety, and long-term economic viability.</p>","PeriodicalId":73088,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in health services","volume":"5 ","pages":"1650709"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12426139/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for implantable medical devices assessment in China.\",\"authors\":\"Yizhou Xu, Junjie Wan, Bin Wan, Haixia Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.3389/frhs.2025.1650709\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aims to develop a standardized multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework tailored for implantable medical devices in China, addressing the challenges of inconsistent evaluation processes under China's evolving healthcare financing policies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A mixed-methods design combining a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and MCDA was employed. Six criteria (clinical effectiveness, clinical safety, innovation, disease severity, implementation capacity, and cost) were identified through literature reviews and expert consultations. A DCE survey with 540 multi-stakeholder participants (decision-makers, HTA experts, clinicians, hospital administrators, and citizens) was conducted to derive criterion weights using mixed logit models. The framework was validated through a real-world case study assessing endoscopic linear staplers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Clinical safety (35.45%) and cost (27.94%) emerged as the most critical criteria, followed by implementation capacity (16.56%) and clinical effectiveness (15.07%). Innovation (2.54%) and disease severity (2.44%) received minimal weight. The MCDA application demonstrated high inter-rater consistency (CV < 0.25).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study proposes a transparent, stakeholder-driven framework for evaluating implantable medical devices, specifically designed to support China's healthcare policies. The framework ensures that healthcare decisions are grounded in clinical effectiveness, safety, and long-term economic viability.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":73088,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"1650709\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12426139/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Frontiers in health services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1650709\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in health services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frhs.2025.1650709","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在为中国植入式医疗器械量身定制一个标准化的多标准决策分析(MCDA)框架,以解决中国不断变化的医疗融资政策下评估过程不一致的挑战。方法:采用离散选择实验(DCE)和MCDA相结合的混合方法设计。通过文献综述和专家咨询,确定了6个标准(临床有效性、临床安全性、创新性、疾病严重程度、实施能力和成本)。对540名多方利益相关者(决策者、HTA专家、临床医生、医院管理人员和公民)进行了DCE调查,使用混合logit模型得出标准权重。该框架通过评估内窥镜线性订书机的真实案例研究进行了验证。结果:临床安全性(35.45%)和成本(27.94%)是最重要的标准,其次是实施能力(16.56%)和临床有效性(15.07%)。创新(2.54%)和疾病严重程度(2.44%)的权重最低。结论:本研究提出了一个透明的、利益相关者驱动的框架来评估植入式医疗器械,专门为支持中国的医疗保健政策而设计。该框架确保医疗保健决策以临床有效性、安全性和长期经济可行性为基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for implantable medical devices assessment in China.

A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for implantable medical devices assessment in China.

A multi-stakeholder multicriteria decision analysis for implantable medical devices assessment in China.

Objectives: This study aims to develop a standardized multicriteria decision analysis (MCDA) framework tailored for implantable medical devices in China, addressing the challenges of inconsistent evaluation processes under China's evolving healthcare financing policies.

Methods: A mixed-methods design combining a discrete choice experiment (DCE) and MCDA was employed. Six criteria (clinical effectiveness, clinical safety, innovation, disease severity, implementation capacity, and cost) were identified through literature reviews and expert consultations. A DCE survey with 540 multi-stakeholder participants (decision-makers, HTA experts, clinicians, hospital administrators, and citizens) was conducted to derive criterion weights using mixed logit models. The framework was validated through a real-world case study assessing endoscopic linear staplers.

Results: Clinical safety (35.45%) and cost (27.94%) emerged as the most critical criteria, followed by implementation capacity (16.56%) and clinical effectiveness (15.07%). Innovation (2.54%) and disease severity (2.44%) received minimal weight. The MCDA application demonstrated high inter-rater consistency (CV < 0.25).

Conclusions: This study proposes a transparent, stakeholder-driven framework for evaluating implantable medical devices, specifically designed to support China's healthcare policies. The framework ensures that healthcare decisions are grounded in clinical effectiveness, safety, and long-term economic viability.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信