Skip to main content

Health Technology Assessment in the Era of Managed Care

Issues in Women’s Health Care

  • Chapter
Book cover Coronary Disease in Women

Abstract

As a result of an aging population and emerging new health technologies, health care providers throughout the world have begun to search for ways to reduce and stabilize the cost of health care while maintaining or improving its quality. Many changes have been implemented based on a growing emphasis on evidence-based decision making and medical practices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Niessen LW, Grijseels EWM, Rutten FFH. The evidence-based approach in health policy and health care delivery. Soc Sci Med 2000; 51: 859–869.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Murray CJ. Toward an analytical approach to health sector reform. Health Policy 1995; 32: 93–109.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hettman F. Society and the Assessment of Technology. Organization for Economic Opportunity and Development; Paris, France: 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Institute of Medicine. Assessing Medical Technologies. National Academic Press; Washington, DC: 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Garber AM. Evidence-based coverage policy: Insurers can borrow from research into medical effectiveness to help them allocate medical resources wisely. Health Affairs 2001; 20: 63–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Shaw LJ, Redberg RF. From clinical trials to public health policy: The path from imaging to screening. A Symposium: First International SAI Meeting. Am J Cardiol 2001; 88: 62E - 65E.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Schoonmaker MM, Bernhardt BA, Holtzman NA. Factors influencing health insurers’ decisions to cover new genetic technologies. Intl J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 178–189.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lange M, Jorgensen T, Kristensen FB, Stilven S. The concept of Health Technology Assessment: Views of applications to funding of HTA projects. Intl J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 1201–1224.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Perry S. Technology assessment in health care: The US perspective. Health Policy 1988; 9: 17–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. International Network of Agencies for Health Technology Assessment (INAHTA). Available at: http://www.inahta.org/.AccessedOctober5,2001.

  11. Drummond M, Weatherly H. Implementing the findings of Health Technology Assessments: If the CAT got out of the bag, can the TAIL wag the dog? Intl J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 1–12.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. http://www.shef.ac.uk/-scharr/ir/units/systrev/hierarchy.htm,HTA;February,2002.

  13. http://cebm.jr2.ox.ac.uk/docs/levels.html,HTA;February,2002

  14. http://www.cche.net/usersguides/economic.asp,HTA;February,2002

  15. Meadows A, ed. Tools for evaluating health technologies. Five background papers. Office of Technology Assessment. Congress of the United States, Washington, DC 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  16. AHRQ Profile: Quality Research for Quality Healthcare. AHRQ Publication No. 00-P005, March 2001. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/about/profile.htm.AccessedOctober5,2001.

  17. Center for Practice and Technology: Assessment Mission and Programs. AHRQ Publication no. 00PO65, August 2001. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD. Available at: http://www.ahrq.gov/about/cptafact.htm.AccessedOctober5,2001.

  18. Connis RT, Nickinovich DG, Caplan RA, Arens JF. The development of evidence-based clinical practice guidelines: Integrating medical science and practice. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2000; 16: 1003–1012.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Oortwijn W, Banta HD, Cranovsky R. Introduction: Mass screening, Health Technology Assessment, and health policy in some European countries. Intl J Technol Assess Health Care 2001; 17: 269–274.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Borràs JM (coordinator). Breast cancer screening in Catalonia: cost-effectiveness, health care impact and cost of the treatment of breast cancer. Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment amp; Catalan. Institute of Oncology, Barcelona: 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Aymerich M, Almazân C, Jovell AJ. Assessment of obstetric ultrasonography for the control of normal pregnancies in primary care. Catalan Agency for Health Technology Assessment, Barcelona: 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Dahlquist G, Alton Lundberg V, Bergh T, et al. Children born from in vitro fertilization (IVF). SBU 2000 (report no. 147 ): p. 102.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hailey D, Sampietro-Colom L, Marshall D, et al. The effectiveness of bone density measurement and associated treatments for prevention of fractures. An international collaborative review. Internt J Health Technol Assess Health Care 1998; 14: 237–254.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Sherman SS. Gender, health and responsible research. Clin Geriat Med 1993; 9: 261–269.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Barret-Connor E, Stuenkel CA. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT): risk and benefits. Int J Epidemiol 2001; 30: 423–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Barret-Connor E, Grady D. Hormone replacement therapy, heart disease, and other considerations. Annu Rev Public Health 1998; 19: 55–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. American College of Physicians. Guidelines for counseling postmenopausal women about preventive hormone replacement therapy. Ann Intern Med 1992; 117: 1038–1041.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Steering Committee of the Physician’s Health Study Group: final report on the aspirin component of the ongoing Physician’s Health Study. N Engl J Med 1989;321:129.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hebert PR, Hennekens CH. An overview of the 4 randomized trials of aspirin therapy in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Arch Intern Med 2000; 160: 3123–3127.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Garcia Rodriguez LA, Varas C, Patrono C. Differential effects of aspirin and non-aspirin nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs in the primary prevention of myocardial infarction in postmenopausal women. Epidemiology 2000; 11: 382–387.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Anonymous. Collaborative overview of randomised trials of antiplatelet therapy. I: Prevention of death, myocardial infarction, and stroke by prolonged antiplatelet therapy in various categories of patients. Antiplatelet Trialists’ Collaboration. BMJ 1994; 308: 81–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Hulley S, Grady D, Bush T, et al. Randomized trial of estrogen plus progestins for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease in postmenopausal women. JAMA 1998; 280: 605–613.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Herrington DM, Reboussin DM, Brosnihan B, et al. Effects of estogen replacement therapy on the progression of coronary-artery atherosclerosis. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 522–529.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Nabel EG. Coronary heart disease in women. An ounce of prevention. N Engl J Med 2000; 343: 572–574.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. American Heart Association. Hormone replacement therapy and cardiovascular disease: a statement for healthcare professionals from the American Heart Association. Circulation 2001; 104: 499–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada, Canadadian Menopause Consensus Conference. Journal of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada 1994; 16: 4–40.

    Google Scholar 

  37. O’Connor AM, Tugwell P, Wells GA, et al. A decision aid for women considering hormone replacement therapy after menopause: decision support framework and evaluation. Patient Educ Counsel 1998; 33: 267–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sampietro-Colom L, Phillips V, Blair A. Eliciting women’s preferences in health care. A review of the literature (Submitted for publication).

    Google Scholar 

  39. Flynn J, Slovic P, Mertz C K. Gender, race and perception of enviromental health risks. Risk Analysis 1994; 14: 1101–1108.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Moore SM, Kramer F M. Women’s and men’s preferences for cardiac rehabilitation program features. J Cardiopulmonary Rehabil 1996; 16: 163–168.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Shaw LJ, Miller D, Romeis JC, et al. Gender differences in the nonivasive evaluation and management of patients with suspected coronary artery disease. Ann Intern Med 1994; 120: 559–566.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Clarke KW, Gray D, Keating NA, Hampton JR. Do women with acute myocardial infarction receive the same treatment as men?. BMJ 1994; 309: 563–566.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Rathore S, Chen J, Wang Y, et al. Sex differences in cardiac catherization: the role of physician gender. JAMA 2001; 286: 2849–2856.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Hippisley-Cox J, Pringle M, Crown N, et al. Sex inequalities in ischaemic heart disease in general practice: cross sectional survey. BMJ 2001; 322: 832.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. US Preventative Services Task Force. Guide to Preclinical Preventative Services: Appendix A Task Force Ratings. 2nd ed., 1996; Available at http://hstat.nlm.nih.gov/ftrs/directbrowse.pl?dbName=cpsamp;href=APPAamp;t=1002299264.AccessedOctober5,2001.

  46. American College of Radiology and Radiological Society of North America. Mammography. Available at http://www.radiologyinfo.org/content/mammogram.htm.AccessedOctober5,2001.

  47. Jepson R, Clegg A, Forbes C, et al. The determinants of screening uptake and interventions for increasing uptake: A systematic review. Health Technol Assess 2000;4:1–148. Available at: http://www.hta.nhsweb.nhs.uk/fullmono/mon414short.pdf.AccessedOctober4,2001.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2004 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Sampietro-Colom, L., Jackson, S., Williams, E., Papatheofanis, F.J. (2004). Health Technology Assessment in the Era of Managed Care. In: Shaw, L.J., Redberg, R.F. (eds) Coronary Disease in Women. Contemporary Cardiology. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-645-4_25

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-59259-645-4_25

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-61737-275-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-59259-645-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics