Responsibility for clinical innovation. A case study in neonatal medicine.
Proper evaluation of clinical innovations and of the process of their diffusion is essential for the development of sound health care policy. This case study examines transcutaneous oxygen monitoring in neonatal intensive care, a procedure that was rapidly adopted in the late 1970s as a scientific breakthrough of great promise, then all but abandoned within a decade in favor of pulse oximetry, a still more recent technology. The study incorporates the results of interviews with representatives of industry as well as biomedical researchers and clinicians involved with these devices. Factors in technology diffusion are analyzed, with special attention to those susceptible to change by policy makers. Participants in the diffusion process also include nurses, hospital administrators, the legal profession, the news media, and the public, but the pivotal role--and hence ultimate responsibility--is seen to be that of the physician. The discussion is presented in the context of a proposed "ethics of evidence" pertinent to medical decision making.
Miké
V
V
Department of Public Health, Cornell University Medical College, New York, NY 10021, USA.
Krauss
A N
AN
Ross
G S
GS
D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D001785:Blood Gas Monitoring, Transcutaneous / Q000379:methods / Q000639:trends*; D004059:Diffusion of Innovation; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D006291:Health Policy / Q000639:trends; D006801:Humans; D007231:Infant, Newborn; D007363:Intensive Care Units, Neonatal / Q000706:statistics & numerical data / Q000639:trends*; D010819:Physician's Role