Needs Assessment For Medical Devices: WHO Medical Device Technical Series
Needs Assessment For Medical Devices: WHO Medical Device Technical Series
Needs Assessment For Medical Devices: WHO Medical Device Technical Series
medical devices
WHO Medical device technical series
Needs assessment for
medical devices
WHO Medical device technical series
WHO Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do
not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health
Organization concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its
authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Dotted lines on
maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement.
The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers’ products does not imply
that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference
to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. Errors and omissions excepted, the
names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters.
All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify
the information contained in this publication. However, the published material is being
distributed without warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied. The responsibility
for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader. In no event shall the
World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use.
Health technologies are essential for a functioning health system. Medical devices
in particular are crucial in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of illness and
disease, as well as patient rehabilitation. Recognizing this important role of health
technologies, the World Health Assembly adopted resolution WHA60.29 in May 2007.
The resolution covers issues arising from the inappropriate deployment and use of health
technologies, and the need to establish priorities in the selection and management of
health technologies, specifically medical devices. By adopting this resolution, delegations
from Member States acknowledged the importance of health technologies for achieving
health-related development goals; urged expansion of expertise in the field of health
technologies, in particular medical devices; and requested that the World Health
Organization (WHO) take specific actions to support Member States.
One of WHO’s strategic objectives is to “ensure improved access, quality and use of
medical products and technologies.” This objective, together with the World Health
Assembly resolution, formed the basis for establishing the Global Initiative on Health
Technologies (GIHT), with funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. GIHT
aims to make core health technologies available at an affordable price, particularly
to communities in resource-limited settings, to effectively control important health
problems. It has two specific objectives:
To meet these objectives, WHO and partners have been working towards devising an
agenda, an action plan, tools and guidelines to increase access to appropriate medical
devices. This document is part of a series of reference documents being developed for
use at the country level. The series will include the following subject areas:
Methodology
The documents in this series were written by international experts in their respective
fields, and reviewed by members of the Technical Advisory Group on Health Technology
(TAGHT). The TAGHT was established in 2009 to provide a forum for both experienced
professionals and country representatives to develop and implement the appropriate
tools and documents to meet the objectives of the GIHT. The group has met on three
occasions. The first meeting was held in Geneva in April 2009 to prioritize which tools
and topics most required updating or developing. A second meeting was held in Rio de
Janeiro in November 2009 to share progress on the health technology management tools
under development since April 2009, to review the current challenges and strategies
facing the pilot countries, and to hold an interactive session for the group to present
proposals for new tools, based on information gathered from the earlier presentations
and discussions. The last meeting was held in Cairo in June 2010 to finalize the
documents and to help countries develop action plans for their implementation. In
addition to these meetings, experts and advisers have collaborated through an online
community to provide feedback on the development of the documents. The concepts
were discussed further during the First WHO Global Forum on Medical Devices in
September 2010. Stakeholders from 106 countries made recommendations on how
to implement the information covered in this series of documents at the country level.1
All meeting participants and people involved in the development of these documents
were asked to complete a declaration of interest form, and no conflicts were identified.
1 First WHO Global Forum on Medical Devices: context, outcomes, and future actions is available at: http://www.who.int/medical_devices/gfmd_report_final.pdf (accessed March
2011)
Recognizing that there are multiple interpretations for the terms listed below, they are
defined as follows for the purposes of this technical series.
Health technology: The application of organized knowledge and skills in the form of
devices, medicines, vaccines, procedures and systems developed to solve a health
problem and improve quality of life.2 It is used interchangeably with health-care
technology.
2 World Health Assembly resolution WHA60.29, May 2007 (http://www.who.int/medical_devices/resolution_wha60_29-en1.pdf, accessed March 2011).
3 Information document concerning the definition of the term “medical device”. Global Harmonization Task Force, 2005 (http://www.ghtf.org/documents/sg1/sg1n29r162005.
pdf, accessed March 2011).
Needs assessment for medical devices was developed under the primary authorship of
Ronald Bauer, Saniplan GmbH, and under the overall direction of Adriana Velazquez-
Berumen, WHO, Geneva, Switzerland as part of the Global Initiative on Health
Technologies project funded by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
The document outline was reviewed by Andrew Gammie (Fishtail Consulting Ltd.) and
James Wear (consultant), and the draft was reviewed by Jennifer Barragan (WHO),
Adham Ismail (WHO), and was edited by Inis Communication.
We would like to thank Aditi A Sharma for assistance in proofreading and Karina Reyes-
Moya and Gudrun Ingolfsdottir for administrative support throughout the development
of this document.
Declarations of interests
Conflict of interest statements were collected from all contributors to and reviewers of
the document. Ronald Bauer declared his employment at Saniplan GmbH, a firm that
provides technical assistance and consulting services with the aim to improve the quality
and accessibility of health systems and services, and Andrew Gammie his employment
at Fishtail Consulting Ltd., a firm that provides advice in the area of medical devices,
particularly in developing countries, as remuneration from an organization with an
interest related to the subject. None of these declared conflicts influenced the content
of the document.
The main objective of this document is The document can be used for single
to provide Member States with guidance facilities as well as for a network of
for a methodological approach, as well facilities, up to national systems (referral
as tools and references, and examples systems). The tools referred to in this
to conduct a proper assessment of document do, however, need to be
their current situation and future needs properly selected and appropriately
with regard to health technologies applied. The ultimate goal is for countries
– specifically, medical devices – in to use the tools for integration of prioritized
consideration of their country’s health needs into national policies and action
burden and disease data. plans.
Because the characteristics of each Note: The references and links provided
Member State vary enormously, this are not intended to be either complete or
document presents only generic comprehensive, but rather a selection of
principles. However, the resources and documents and tools identified by WHO
examples shown (or referred to) should as sources of information for decision-
enable any country to elaborate or makers.
adapt these principles according to their
particular needs.
Prioritization
Budgetary
Overall gap / and HR Prioritized need
Analysing/interpreting need situation
Baseline data
4 Specific approach
Expanding upon the general approach, suggestions for analysing and interpreting
this section summarizes the seven spe- the results of Steps I-V. Lastly, Step VII
cific data collection and analysis steps of briefly discusses the issue of prioritization
the needs assessment process. Steps I-III and option appraisal.
refer to the baseline information collection
of health service requirements, health The tables in Steps I-V also summarize
service availability, and health technol- what information is to be collected,
ogy. Steps IV and V refer to the specific the data to be considered during the
situation in terms of human resources collection process, and the desired result
and finances – and possible respective of the process. Due to the cross-cutting
constraints – of the administration of the nature of the process, the same outcomes
facility, region or state. Step VI provides may be mentioned in multiple steps.
Complete details on Step I are not provided WHO has information available at the
here, as they are outside the scope of this country level while national ministries of
document and the responsibility of the health (MoHs) may have more detailed
GIHT. However, Step I remains critically information.1
important to address, as it directly refers to
the health situation of the target population.
1 WHO country profiles are available at http://www.who.int/countries/en
This is the key step in the process with ›› power supply, electrical connec-
regard to health technology. The main tions and installations (e.g., is an
goal is to identify what is available in emergency generator available?);
terms of medical devices and related ›› waste disposal system (e.g., how
infrastructure, and their condition. It is is waste handled, segregated, and
important to collect as much detailed and disposed of?).
reliable information as possible, because
any change, correction or improvement Medical equipment1
will have a major impact on the financial
and human resources, as well as on the • type and number of equipment
environment. • brand name
• model
A two-step approach can be followed • year of manufacture
where the first step is a neutral, quantitative • date of installation
assessment, and the second, a more de- • location (medical department)
tailed, qualitative assessment. It is up to • physical condition (in operation/out
the implementer to decide if the second of order/repairable)
step is desired or necessary. • spare parts required/available for
repair
Taking Table 4 into account, some of the • tools available for inspection, main-
key information to be collected includes tenance, and repair
the following: • medical equipment history if available
(operation/use time, maintenance/
Infrastructure repair).
2 Reference information for these tools can be found under Useful Resources.
3 Tool requires technical support from WHO before use.
• existing posts and job descriptions Further details on Step IV are not provided
• number of vacant posts here, as this is outside the scope of
• status and availability of: this document and the responsibility of
›› basic, higher or vocational educa- the GIHT. This information should be
tion available at the HR department of your
›› continuous training administration.
The minimum information that should be Further details on Step V are not provided
available for collection and assessment is: here, as this is outside the scope of
this document and the responsibility of
• budget and expenses from previous the GIHT. This information should be
periods available at the financial department of
• current budget your administration.
• system of monitoring/controlling
budget.
The aim will be to give first priority to having little impact. It may be tempting/
actions that will have the highest positive attractive to go ahead with these actions,
impact on the ability to provide optimal but they can prove to be a distraction
services to the target population, as well from the more high-impact actions. For
as require the fewest additional resources. this reason, it is usually better to wait until
the ‘quick wins’ have been successfully
At the other extreme, it is better to avoid implemented first.
making changes that are likely to have a
low impact but which require a high level Hooper and Longworth (2002) suggest
of resources. In between are those actions that a number of key questions should be
that are likely to have a high impact, addressed when appraising the options
but will also demand high resources. In and prioritizing the needs following a
most circumstances, these would not be needs assessment exercise. These
selected for immediate action either, but questions focus on the issues of impact,
rather, considered as long-term options. changeability, acceptability and resource
feasibility, and are adapted here for the
Similarly, so called ‘soft targets’ are those application of needs assessment of health
actions requiring few resources but technology.
For these and more resources, please visit the World Health Organization Library
Information System (WHOLIS) at http://dosei.who.int, or the e-Documentation centre
for WHO Health Technologies/Medical devices at http://hinfo.humaninfo.ro/gsdl/
healthtechdocs.
Rapid health facility assessment flow chart. New York, International Health Facility
Assessment Network, 2007 (http://ihfan.org/home/docs/attachments/ms-08-28_
flowchart.pdf).
Temple-Bird C. Practical steps for developing health care technology policy. Brighton,
Institute of Development Studies, 2000.
Development of medical device policies, strategies and action plans. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 2011.
Interagency list of essential medical devices for reproductive health. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 2008 (http://whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2008/WHO_PSM_PAR_2008.1_
eng.pdf).
Integrated Management for Emergency and Essential Surgical Care (IMEESC) tool.
Geneva, World Health Organization (http://www.who.int/surgery/publications/imeesc/
en/index.html).
Models and medical equipment guidelines. Mexico City, Centro Nacional de Excelencia
Tecnológica en Salud (CENETEC) (http://www.cenetec.salud.gob.mx/interior/modelos_
equip.html).
Primary health care centres and first referral level hospitals. Planning guide: Equipment
and renewable resources. New York, United Nations Children’s Fund, 2005 (http://
www.unicef.org/supply/files/050307PlanningGuideHandbookAug2005%281%29.pdf).
A stepwise approach to identify gaps in medical devices (availability matrix and survey
methodology). Background paper 1. Geneva, World Health Organization, 2010 (http://
whqlibdoc.who.int/hq/2010/WHO_HSS_EHT_DIM_10.1_eng.pdf).
‘How to Manage’ series of health care technology guides. St Albans, Ziken International
(Health Partners International), 2005 (http://www.healthpartners-int.co.uk/our_expertise/
how_to_manage_series.html).
Liu, X. Policy tools for allocative efficiency of health services. Geneva, World Health
Organization, 2003 (http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2003/9241562528.pdf).
Pre-assessment
>1 million USD?
study
No
Yes
Evaluation