4.4 Article

Enabling health technology innovation in Canada: Barriers and facilitators in policy and regulatory processes

期刊

HEALTH POLICY
卷 123, 期 2, 页码 203-214

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.09.018

关键词

Health technology; Innovation; Health policy; Canada

资金

  1. AGE-WELL (Aging Gracefully across Environments using technology to support Wellness, Engagement and Long Life) Network
  2. Government of Canada's Networks of Centres of Excellence (NCE) Program
  3. AGE-WELL Graduate Fellowship

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives:Health care innovation and technologies can improve patient outcomes, but policies and regulations established to protect the public interest may become barriers to improvement of health care delivery. We conducted a scoping review to identify policy and regulatory barriers to, and facilitators of, successful innovation and adoption of health technologies (excluding pharmaceutical and information technologies) in Canada. Methods:The review followed Arksey and O'Malley's methodology to assess the breadth and depth of literature on this topic and drew upon published and grey literature from 2000-2016. Four reviewers independently screened citations for inclusion. Results:Sixty-seven full-text documents were extracted to collect facilitators and barriers to health technology innovation and adoption. The extraction table was themed using content analysis, and reanalyzed, resulting in facilitators and barriers under six broad themes: development, assessment, implementation, Canadian policy context, partnerships and resources. Conclusion: This scoping review identified current barriers and highlights numerous facilitators to create a responsive regulatory and policy environment that encourages and supports effective co-creation of innovations to optimize patient and economic outcomes while emphasizing the importance of sustainability of health technologies. (C) 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据