Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4rdrl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-07T03:19:54.805Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Early Warning of New Health Care Technologies in the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2009

Andrew Stevens
Affiliation:
The University of Birmingham
Claire Packer
Affiliation:
The University of Birmingham
Glenn Robert
Affiliation:
University of Southampton

Abstract

In this paper we describe the present range of organizations that have a role in the early warning of new and emerging health care technologies in the United Kingdom. We discuss in more detail the processes and prioritization criteria used by the U.K. horizon-scanning project for the NHS Health Technology Assessment Programme, and the principal methods of technology identification for the horizon-scanning project are outlined. The United Kingdom plans to develop an integrated system for the identification of technologies for commercial planning, health service research prioritization, financial planning, and provision of information to policy makers, purchasers, and providers of health care.

Type
Special Section: Early Identification and Assessment of Emerging Health Technology
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Academy of Medical Royal Colleges. Safety and efficacy register of new interventional procedures of the Medical Royal Colleges (SERNIP) (newsletter). London: Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, 05 1997.Google Scholar
2.Best, L., Stevens, A., & Colin-Jones, D.Rapid and responsive health technology assessment: The development and evaluation process in the South and West region of England. Journal of Clinical Effectiveness, 1997, 2, 5156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.National Coordinating Centre for Health Technology Assessment. The annual report of the NHS Health Technology Assessment Program 1997. London: Department of Health, 1997.Google Scholar
4.The National Prescribing Centre: Encouraging high-quality practice. Pharmaceutical Journal, 1996, 257, 282–85.Google Scholar
5.Robert, G., Stevens, A., & Gabbay, J.Which are the best information sources for identifying emerging health care technologies? An international Delphi survey. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1998, 14, 4, 636–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Steering Committee on Future Health Scenarios. Anticipating and assessing health care technology, vol. 1: General considerations and policy conclusions. The Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff, 1987.Google Scholar
7.Stein, K. Development and Evaluation Committee Report Number 69: Donepezil in the treatment of mild to moderate senile dementia of the Alzheimer type (SDAT). Wessex Institute for Health Research and Development, University of Southampton, 1997.Google Scholar
8.Stevens, A. (ed). Health technology evaluation research reviews III. Wessex Institute for Health Research and Development, University of Southampton, 1995.Google Scholar
9.Stevens, A., Robert, G., & Gabbay, J.Identifying new health care technologies in the United Kingdom. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 1997, 13, 5967.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
10.United Kingdom Drug Information Pharmacists Group. Judd, A. (ed). United Kingdom Drug Information Manual, 4th ed.Leeds: U.K. Drug Information Pharmacists Group, 1997.Google Scholar
11.United Kingdom Office of Science and Technology. Winning through foresight: Action for health and life science. London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1997.Google Scholar