Table 2. Prioritisation tool domains and criteria. |
Population/end-user domain of prioritisation tool. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Disease frequency |
The condition or indication for which the potentially obsolete technology can be used is frequent (high prevalence and/or incidence). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Disease burden |
The condition or indication for which the potentially obsolete technology can be used amounts to a considerable health loss for the patient (mortality, morbidity, disability). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Frequency of use of technology |
The potentially obsolete technology is currently applied to a high number of patients. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Patient preferences |
There is scientific evidence of a lower acceptance by patients of the potentially obsolete technology versus other existing technological alternatives (e.g., greater unpleasantness, greater discomfort, longer treatments). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risk/benefit domain of prioritisation tool. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Efficacy/Effectiveness/Validity |
The scientific literature indicates that the potentially obsolete technology displays less efficacy or effectiveness than other alternative technologies. If it is a diagnostic technology, the potentially obsolete diagnostic test is less valid (yields more false positives and negatives than other available diagnostic tests). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adverse effects |
There is evidence in the literature of more adverse or more important effects with the potentially obsolete technology versus other existing technological alternatives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Risks |
The potentially obsolete technology poses a higher likelihood of health-care staff falling ill or having a work accident (e.g., radiations) or of a greater environmental hazard (e.g., waste) than do other existing technological alternatives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Costs domain, organisation and other implications of the prioritisation tool. |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
Efficiency |
There are financial evaluation studies that are more favourable for other existing technological alternatives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maintenance costs |
The potentially obsolete technology requires more resources for its functioning (e.g., consumables, reviews, human resources, etc.) versus other existing technological alternatives. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other implications |
It is foreseeable that withdrawal of the potentially obsolete technology will have a positive impact on the ethical, cultural and/or legal sphere. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|