IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/medema/v34y2014i8p1006-1015.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision to Adopt Medical Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Heather Taffet Gold
  • Kimberly Pitrelli
  • Mary Katherine Hayes
  • Madhuvanti Mahadeo Murphy

Abstract

Objective. To understand decision making concerning adoption and nonadoption of accelerated partial breast radiotherapy (RT) prior to long-term randomized trial evidence. Methods. A total of 36 radiation oncologists and surgeons were recruited through purposive and snowball sampling strategies from September 2010 through January 2013. Semistructured phone interviews were conducted and audio-recorded and lasted 20–45 minutes. Qualitative analysis was conducted using a framework approach, iteratively exploring key concepts and emerging issues raised by subjects. Interviews were transcribed and imported into Atlas.ti v6. Transcripts were independently coded by 3 researchers shortly after each interview, followed by consensus development on each coded transcript. Barriers and facilitators of adoption, practice patterns, and informational/educational sources concerning accelerated partial breast RT were all assessed to determine major themes. Results. Nearly half of physicians were surgeons (47%), and half were radiation oncologists (53%), with 61% overall in urban settings. Twenty-nine of the 36 physicians interviewed used brachytherapy-based partial breast RT. Five major factors were involved in physicians’ decisions to adopt accelerated partial breast RT: facilitators encouraging adoption (e.g., enthusiastic colleagues and patient convenience), financial and prestige incentives, pressures to adopt (e.g., potential declines in referrals), judgment concerning acceptable level of scientific evidence, and barriers (e.g., not having appropriate machinery or referral mechanism in place). If technology was adopted, clinical guideline adherence varied. Conclusions. Technology adoption is based on financial and social pressures, along with often-limited scientific evidence and what seems “best†for patients. For technology adoption and diffusion to be rational and evidence-based, we must encourage appropriate financial payment models to curb use outside of research studies and promote development of additional treatment registries until sufficient evidence is gathered.

Suggested Citation

  • Heather Taffet Gold & Kimberly Pitrelli & Mary Katherine Hayes & Madhuvanti Mahadeo Murphy, 2014. "Decision to Adopt Medical Technology," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 34(8), pages 1006-1015, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:8:p:1006-1015
    DOI: 10.1177/0272989X14541679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0272989X14541679
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0272989X14541679?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles, Cathy & Gafni, Amiram & Whelan, Tim, 1999. "Decision-making in the physician-patient encounter: revisiting the shared treatment decision-making model," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 49(5), pages 651-661, September.
    2. Jonathan Skinner & Douglas Staiger, 2007. "Technology Adoption from Hybrid Corn to Beta-Blockers," NBER Chapters, in: Hard-to-Measure Goods and Services: Essays in Honor of Zvi Griliches, pages 545-570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Jonathan Skinner & Douglas Staiger, 2007. "Technology Adoption from Hybrid Corn to Beta-Blockers," NBER Chapters, in: Hard-to-Measure Goods and Services: Essays in Honor of Zvi Griliches, pages 545-570, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Renata Walczak & Magdalena Kludacz-Alessandri & Liliana Hawrysz, 2022. "Use of Telemedicine Technology among General Practitioners during COVID-19: A Modified Technology Acceptance Model Study in Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(17), pages 1-18, September.
    2. Cathy J. Bradley & David Neumark & Lauryn Saxe Walker, 2017. "The Effect of Primary Care Visits on Health Care Utilization: Findings from a Randomized Controlled Trial," NBER Working Papers 24100, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Bradley, Cathy J. & Neumark, David & Walker, Lauryn Saxe, 2018. "The effect of primary care visits on other health care utilization: A randomized controlled trial of cash incentives offered to low income, uninsured adults in Virginia," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 121-133.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Feng, Yao, 2011. "Local spillovers and learning from neighbors: Evidence from durable adoptions in rural China," MPRA Paper 33924, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Moscone, Francesco & Tosetti, Elisa & Vittadini, Giorgio, 2009. "Social Interaction in Patients'�Hospital Choice: Evidences from Italy," MPRA Paper 17783, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. repec:zbw:rwirep:0365 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Freedman, Seth & Lin, Haizhen & Simon, Kosali, 2015. "Public health insurance expansions and hospital technology adoption," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 117-131.
    5. Gagliardi, Dimitri & Ramlogan, Ronnie & Navarra, Pierluigi & Dello Russo, Cinzia, 2018. "Diffusion of complementary evolving pharmaceutical innovations: The case of Abacavir and its pharmacogenetic companion diagnostic in Italy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 223-233.
    6. Brigitte Evelyne Granville & Carol Scott Leonard, 2006. "Do institutions matter for technological change in transition economies? The case of the Russia's 89 regions and republics," UCL SSEES Economics and Business working paper series 70, UCL School of Slavonic and East European Studies (SSEES).
    7. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2010. "An Exploration of Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2031-2059, December.
    8. Javitt, Jonathan C. & Rebitzer, James B. & Reisman, Lonny, 2008. "Information technology and medical missteps: Evidence from a randomized trial," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 585-602, May.
    9. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 2010. "Adoption Curves and Social Interactions," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 8(1), pages 232-251, March.
    10. Jörg Peters & Christoph Strupat & Colin Vance, 2012. "Television and Contraceptive Use – Panel Evidence from Rural Indonesia," Ruhr Economic Papers 0365, Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Universität Dortmund, Universität Duisburg-Essen.
    11. Baltagi, Badi H. & Moscone, Francesco, 2010. "Health care expenditure and income in the OECD reconsidered: Evidence from panel data," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 804-811, July.
    12. Chatzimichael Konstantinos & Daskalaki Charoula & Emvalomatis Grigorios & Tsagris Michail & Tzouvelekas Vangelis, 2025. "Factors shaping innovative behavior: A meta‐analysis of technology adoption studies in agriculture," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 73(1), pages 75-103, March.
    13. Ludwig, Jens & Marcotte, Dave E. & Norberg, Karen, 2009. "Anti-depressants and suicide," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 659-676, May.
    14. Granville, Brigitte & Leonard, Carol S., 2010. "Do Informal Institutions Matter for Technological Change in Russia? The Impact of Communist Norms and Conventions, 1998-2004," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 155-169, February.
    15. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adoption," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 395-424, September.
    16. Miller, Douglas L. & Paxson, Christina, 2006. "Relative income, race, and mortality," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(5), pages 979-1003, September.
    17. Shanjun Li & Ramanan Laxminarayan, 2015. "Are Physicians' Prescribing Decisions Sensitive to Drug Prices? Evidence from a Free‐antibiotics Program," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(2), pages 158-174, February.
    18. Kohei Enami & John Mullahy, 2008. "Tobit at Fifty: A Brief History of Tobin's Remarkable Estimator, of Related Empirical Methods, and of Limited Dependent Variable Econometrics in Health Economics," NBER Working Papers 14512, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Frank Lichtenberg, 2011. "The quality of medical care, behavioral risk factors, and longevity growth," International Journal of Health Economics and Management, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 1-34, March.
    20. Leila Agha & David Molitor, 2018. "The Local Influence of Pioneer Investigators on Technology Adoption: Evidence from New Cancer Drugs," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(1), pages 29-44, March.
    21. Moscone, F. & Tosetti, E., 2010. "Testing for error cross section independence with an application to US health expenditure," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(5), pages 283-291, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:medema:v:34:y:2014:i:8:p:1006-1015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.