Medical device procurement in low- and middle-income settings: Protocol for a systematic review

被引：5
作者：
Diaconu K. [1 ]
Chen Y.-F. [2 ]
Manaseki-Holland S. [1 ]
Cummins C. [1 ]
Lilford R. [1 ,2 ]
机构：
[1] Public Health, University of Birmingham, Epidemiology and Statistics Unit, Department of Health and Population Sciences, Edgbaston, West Midlands
[2] Health Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry
来源：
Systematic Reviews | / 3卷 / 1期
基金：
英国工程与自然科学研究理事会;
关键词：
Developing countries; Medical devices; Prioritization; Procurement;
D O I：
10.1186/2046-4053-3-118
中图分类号：
学科分类号：
摘要：
Background: Medical device procurement processes for low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) are a poorly understood and researched topic. To support LMIC policy formulation in this area, international public health organizations and research institutions issue a large body of predominantly grey literature including guidelines, manuals and recommendations. We propose to undertake a systematic review to identify and explore the medical device procurement methodologies suggested within this and further literature. Procurement facilitators and barriers will be identified, and methodologies for medical device prioritization under resource constraints will be discussed.Methods/design: Searches of both bibliographic and grey literature will be conducted to identify documents relating to the procurement of medical devices in LMICs. Data will be extracted according to protocol on a number of pre-specified issues and variables. First, data relating to the specific settings described within the literature will be noted. Second, information relating to medical device procurement methodologies will be extracted, including prioritization of procurement under resource constraints, the use of evidence (e.g. cost-effectiveness evaluations, burden of disease data) as well as stakeholders participating in procurement processes. Information relating to prioritization methodologies will be extracted in the form of quotes or keywords, and analysis will include qualitative meta-summary. Narrative synthesis will be employed to analyse data otherwise extracted. The PRISMA guidelines for reporting will be followed.Discussion: The current review will identify recommended medical device procurement methodologies for LMICs. Prioritization methods for medical device acquisition will be explored. Relevant stakeholders, facilitators and barriers will be discussed. The review is aimed at both LMIC decision makers and the international research community and hopes to offer a first holistic conceptualization of this topic. © 2014 Diaconu et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 30 条
  • [1] Perry L., Malkin R., Effectiveness of medical equipment donations to improve health systems: how much medical equipment is broken in the developing world?, Med Biol Eng Comput, 49, pp. 719-722, (2011)
  • [2] Managing the Mismatch (An outcome of the Priority Medical Devices project), (2010)
  • [3] World Health Organization Local Production and Technology Transfer to Increase Access to Medical Devices: Addressing the barriers and challenges in low- and middle-income countries, (2012)
  • [4] Future public health needs: communalities and differences between high- and low-resource settings in Geneva, Medical Devices: Managing the Mismatch (An outcome of the Priority Medical Devices Project), (2010)
  • [5] Howitt P., Darzi A., Yang G.Z., Ashrafian H., Atun R., Barlow J., Blakemore A., Bull A.M.J., Car J., Conteh L., Cooke G.S., Ford N., Gregson S.J., Kerr K., King D., Kulendran M., Malkin R., Majeed A., Matlin S., Merrified R., Penfolf H., Reid S.D., Smith P.C., Stevens M.M., Templeton M.R., Vincent C., Wilson E., Technologies for global health, Lancet, 380, pp. 507-535, (2012)
  • [6] National Institute of Health and Care Excellence Guide to the Methods of Technology Appraisal 2013, (2013)
  • [7] Clinical evidence for medical devices: regulatory processes focusing on Europe and the United States of America Geneva, Medical Devices: Managing the Mismatch (An outcome of the Priority Medical Devices Project), (2010)
  • [8] Canadian Health Technology Assessment Task Group Health technology strategy 1. 0 final report
  • [9] Fricke F.U., Dauben H.P., Health technology assessment: a perspective from Germany, Value Health, 12, pp. S20-S27, (2009)
  • [10] (2010)
123