A Scoping Review of the Health Technology Procurement Decision Process in Indonesia

Andrew Cashin orcid scopus  -  School of Health and Human Sciences, Southern Cross University, Australia
*Roxsana Devi Tumanggor orcid  -  Psychiatric Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing, University of Sumatera Utara, Indonesia
Received: 14 Nov 2018; Published: 26 Jun 2019.
Open Access Copyright (c) 2019 Nurse Media Journal of Nursing

Citation Format:
Article Info
Section: Articles
Language: EN
Statistics: 486 454

Background: There is no doubt technological development in the caring sciences can be an enabler of better outcomes. Technological development and the adoption of new technology can also become a constraint and pose challenges to the current patterns of work and organizational elements. A framework for decision making of when to purchase and incorporate new technology is required.

Purpose: This paper aimed to determine what is known of procurement decisions of advanced technology in healthcare generally and particularly in Indonesia.

Methods: A scoping review was conducted to ascertain the current understanding of what forms the basis of procurement decisions of health technology generally and particularly in Indonesia.   

Results: A paucity of peer review literature was identified. There was no identified peer reviewed literature with a focus on Indonesia. Without a guiding evidence base and agreed decision making framework, it is likely that there is great variation in practices.

Conclusion: In the absence of a solid body of literature to inform practices, two principals to move to a sustainable adoption and integration of advancing and emerging technology into practice in the health care sciences are presented, and provide a scaffold to facilitate navigating what can be tricky waters constituted by enthusiasm and trepidation.
Keywords: Health technology; innovation; nursing; nursing adoption of health technology; procurement

Article Metrics:

  1. Ahern, D., Woods, S., Lightowler, M., Finely, S., & Houston, T. (2011). Promise of and potential for patient-facing technologies to enable meaningful use. American Jounral of Preventative Medicine, 40(5s2), 162-172.
  2. Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19-32.
  3. Buntin, M., Burke, M., Hoaglin, M., & Blumenthal, D. (2011). The benefits of health information technology: A review of the recent literature shows predominantly positive results. Health Affairs, 30(3), 464-471.
  4. Cashin, A. (2011). Word power and linguistic constructs in nursing. In A. Cashin & R. Cook (Eds.), Evidence-based practice in nursing informatics (Vol. 1, pp. 17-24). New York: Medical Information Science Reference.
  5. Cashin, A., Buckley, T., Donoghue, J., Heartfield, M., Bryce, J., Cox, D., . . . Dunn, S. V. (2015). Development of the Nurse Practitioner Standards for Practice Australia. Policy, Politics, & Nursing Practice,14, 27-37.
  6. Cashin, A., Heartfield, M., Bryce, J., Devey, L., Buckley, T., Cox, D., . . . Fisher, M. (2017). Standards for practice for registered nurses in Australia. Collegian, 24(3), 255-266.
  7. Casselman, J., Onopa, N., & Khansa, L. (2017). Wearable healthcare: Lessons from the past and a peek into the future. Telematics and Informatics, 34, 1011-1023.
  8. Cheng, Y., Huang, L., Ramlogan, R., & Li, X. (2017). Forecasting of potential impacts of disruptive technology in promising technological areas: Elaborating the SIRS epidemic model in RFID technology. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 117, 170-183.
  9. Clifford, G., Blaya, J., Hall-Clifford., Fraser. (2008). Medical information systems: a foundation for healthcare technologies in developing countries. Biomedical Engineering, 7 (2), 1-8.
  10. Coye, M., & Kell, J. (2006). How hosptials confront new technology. Health Affairs, 25(1), 163-173.
  11. Dawes, R., Faust, D., & Meehl, P. (1989). Clinical versus actuarial judgement. Science, 243(Mar 31), 1668-1674.
  12. Dorsey, E., & Topol, E. (2016). State of Telehealth. The New England Journal of Medicine, 375(2), 154-161.
  13. Ebersold, K., & Glass, R. (2015). The impact of disruptive technology: The internet of things. Issues in information systems, 16(4), 194-201.
  14. Elder, J. (2018, 12th August, 2018). The robot doctor will see you now. The Sydney Morning Herald.
  15. Goodburn, E., & Campbell, O. (2001). Reducing maternal mortality in the developing world: sector-wide approaches may be the key. BMJ, 322, 917-920.
  16. Halliday, M. (1975). Learning how to mean: Explorations in the development of language. London: Edward Arnold.
  17. Harris, P., Nagy, S., & Vardaxis, N. (2010). Mosby's dictionary of medicine, nursing and health professions (2nd Australian and New Zealand edition ed.). Sydney: Mosby.
  18. Harter, S.(1986). Online information retrieval: concepts, principles and techniques. Orlando: Academic Press.
  19. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Malden: Blackwell Publishing.
  20. Huckle, D. (2008). Point of care diagnostics: an advancing sector with nontechnical issues. Expert reviews, 8(6), 679-687.
  21. Jones, S., Rudin, R., Perry, T., & Shekelle, P. (2014). Health information technology: An updated systematic review with a focus on meaningful use. Annals of Internal Medicine, 160(1), 48-54.
  22. Kosherbayeva, L., Haily, D., Kurakbaev, K., Tsoy, A., Zhuzzhanov, O.,Donbay, A., Kumar, A. and Nadyrov, K. (2016). Implementation of health technology assessment work in a hospital in Kazakhstan. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Healthcare, 32(1/2), 78-80.
  23. Lingg, M., Wyss, K. and Duran-Arenas, L. (2016). Effects of procurement practices on quality of medical device or service received: A qualitative study comparing countries. BMC Health Services Research, 16:362, 1-13.
  24. McGarry, D., Cashin, A., & Fowler, C. (2014). Survey of Australian schools of nursing use of human patient (mannequin) simulation. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 35(11), 815-823.
  25. Miller, M., & Morris, N. (1998). Predictors of dangerousness: An arguement for limited use. Violence and victims, 34(4), 263-283.
  26. Pearl, R. (2014). Kaiser Permanente northern California: Current experiences with internet, mobile and video technologies. Health Affairs, 33(2), 251-257.
  27. Seeberg, J., Pannarunothai,S., Padmawati, R., Trisnantoro, L., Barua, N., Pandav, C. (2013). Treatment seeking and health financing in selected poor urban neighbourhoods in India, Indonesia and Thailand. Social Science & Medicine,102, 49-57.
  28. Schwamm, L. (2014). Telehealth: Seven strategies to successfully implement disruptive technology and transform health care. Health Affairs, 33(2), 200-2006.
  29. Sless, D. (1986). In search of semiotics. Sydney: Croom Helm.
  30. Smith, F. (1982). Florence Nightingale reputation and power. London: Croom Helm.
  31. Sultan, N. (2015). Reflective thoughts on the potential and challenges of wearable technology for healthcare provision and medical evaluation. International Journal of Information Management, 35, 521-526.
  32. Tangcharoensathien, V; Patcharanarumol, W; Ir, P; Aljunid, SM; Mukti, AG; Akkhavong, K; Banzon, E; Huong, DB; Thabrany, H; Mills, A (2011) Health in Southeast Asia 6 Health-financing reforms in southeast Asia: challenges in achieving universal coverage. Lancet, 377 (9768), 863-873.
  33. Torbica, A. and Cappellaro, G. (2010). Uptake and diffusion of medical technolgy innovation in Europe: What role for funding and procurement policies?. Journal of Medical Marketing, 10(1), 61-69.
  34. Wu, J., Li, H., Cheng, S., & Lin, Z. (2016). The promising future of healthcare services: When big data analytics meets wearable technology. Information and Management, 53, 1020-1033.