inglês

466 views
422 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
466
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

inglês

  1. 1. Product Selection Based on Criteria and Standards Pat Solkshinitz, R.N. Product Facilitator Product Standardization Calgary Health Region Calgary, Alberta, Canada
  2. 2. Calgary Health Region <ul><li>Calgary has 4 acute care hospitals </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Foothills Medical Centre </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Alberta Children’s Hospital </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Rockyview General Hospital </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Peter Lougheed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Care in the Community </li></ul><ul><li>Healthy Communities </li></ul><ul><li>Regional Warehouse for Inventory Products </li></ul><ul><li>Regional Surgical Specialties Assembly Centre </li></ul>
  3. 3. Regionalization of Health Care Systems in Calgary: <ul><li>Standardization of Practices has led to standardization of products and medical equipment. (see handout #1 “ Definition and Process for Product Standardization and Evaluation”) </li></ul><ul><li>Standardization of products/equipment has resulted in decreased costs and improved quality of patient care. </li></ul>
  4. 4. Standardization of Medical Products and Equipment Recommendations prior to Tender/Purchase <ul><ul><li>Research Technology </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Utilize Clinical Specialists in Product Review </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Research Government Guidelines </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Utilize ECRI Product Reports/Testing Data </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Benchmark with other Institutions or Regions </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify current products being used (numbers used, types, brands, specifications) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Identify Practice (Current and Changing) </li></ul></ul>
  5. 5. Identify Current Products <ul><li>Initial Information Gathering </li></ul><ul><ul><li>how many products are used annually </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>who uses the product </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>how many products have similar characteristics/specifications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>how many variations/sizes of the product are used </li></ul></ul><ul><li>what is the cost of each product </li></ul><ul><li>obtain samples of all current products </li></ul>
  6. 6. Identify Current Practice <ul><li>Current Practice </li></ul><ul><ul><li>identify steps in practice where the product is utilized </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>identify the group of staff/patients that are dedicated to this practice </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Change in Practice </li></ul><ul><ul><li>identify where steps could be streamlined </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>incorporate emerging technology that will improve patient outcomes </li></ul></ul>
  7. 7. Research Product Information <ul><li>Benchmark </li></ul><ul><ul><li>with other health facilities/regions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Research technology using: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>clinical staff members </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>clinical publications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Government Regulations/Standards/Guidelines </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>ECRI Testing and Reports </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Therapeutic Products Program <ul><li>Health Canada’s Therapeutic Products Program is the national authority which regulates drugs, medical devices and other therapeutic products used in Canada. </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Medical Device Problem Reporting </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Medical Devices Bureau </li></ul></ul>
  9. 9. Medical Devices Bureau Regulations <ul><li>This is a branch of the TPP which monitors and evaluates the safety, effectiveness and quality of diagnostic and therapeutic medical devices in Canada. </li></ul><ul><li>Web Site: www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb-dgps/therapeut/htmleng/schedule.html#1101 (New Medical Devices Regulations - May 27, 1998) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Medical Device Licence Classifications (see handout #2 “Medical Device Classifications”) </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Class I </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Class II </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Class III </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Class IV </li></ul></ul></ul>
  10. 10. Selection of Criteria <ul><li>Criteria for Tendering Purposes </li></ul><ul><ul><li>current product information/specifications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>size, shape, function, material, packaging </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>(See handout #3 “Product Specifications Profile”) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>staff members agreed upon “new” specifications </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>may use new/emerging technology specifications </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>may use current product specifications chosen as “standardized” product by staff members </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Note any changes to practice with new product criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Note any change in usage related to new product criteria and/or practice </li></ul>
  11. 11. Steps in Product Selection <ul><li>Identify Problem or Need (see handout #4 “Needs Assessment Worksheet”) </li></ul><ul><li>Establish Product Specifications </li></ul><ul><li>Tender Process </li></ul><ul><li>Decision to Evaluate pre or post tender </li></ul><ul><li>Review Evaluation results </li></ul><ul><li>Award Product </li></ul><ul><li>Implement Product </li></ul><ul><li>Re-assess product in 6-12 months post-implementation </li></ul>
  12. 12. Mandatory versus Non-Mandatory Weighted Criteria <ul><li>Establish what the product must do </li></ul><ul><ul><li>if the product does not contain this property - you cannot use it) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Establish what you would like the product to do that is not mandatory </li></ul><ul><ul><li>these are specifications that are “nice to have” </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Weigh the non-mandatory criteria according to its importance (scale of 1-10) </li></ul><ul><li>Include all mandatory and non-mandatory criteria in the RFP document (see handout #5 and #6 “Mandatory and Non-Mandatory Criteria Sample) </li></ul>
  13. 13. Mandatory Criteria <ul><li>Do not make the mandatory criteria so rigid that there is only once choice of product that could ever meet your needs </li></ul><ul><ul><li>costs can be affected if choice is removed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>supply of product could be limited and sporadic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>potentially you could have no bid responses from vendors (re-tendering time and costs would be involved) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ensure that criteria is simple and fully defined </li></ul>
  14. 14. Non-Mandatory Criteria <ul><li>Weigh the specific function so that it best meets your needs and offers you more than one choice of product </li></ul><ul><li>Use a simple scale of 1-10 to keep the results workable </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure that not all criteria is weighted “10” - this will allow for easier identification of “best” product once results are tabulated </li></ul>
  15. 15. Tendering Process <ul><li>Outline specific products, usage, specifications </li></ul><ul><li>Prepare Request for Proposal (RFP) Document based on hospital purchasing standards (see handout #7 “Calgary Health Region RFP” ) </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure timelines are appropriate: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Responding Vendors have enough time to organize an appropriate bid </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Your Purchasing Department has enough time to organize all of the bids and samples received </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time is allowed for staff members to review bids and move to evaluation if required </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Time to allow for ease of transition from old to new product </li></ul></ul>
  16. 16. Product Selection Weighting <ul><li>Inform vendors in the RFP that product will be selected based on varying % of the following: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Clinical Acceptability </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Latex-free Product </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Price and Price Protection </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Value Added Content </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Overall Best Value </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Acceptance of Standard Terms and Conditions </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Percentage used to award product varies - Price is usually 30-50% of equation - clinical can be 50-70% depending on the clinical needs </li></ul>
  17. 17. Organizing Bids <ul><li>Review bids on all levels (i.e. grouping certain products or analyze each single item) </li></ul><ul><li>Analyze current costs versus potential costs related to “grouping” and “single” </li></ul><ul><li>Organize products for review by staff members on a low cost to high cost basis </li></ul><ul><li>Organize and ensure samples of all products are available for staff members to review </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure that all requested “product specification” material has been received by the bidding company (i.e. data relating to product performance, third party research material) </li></ul>
  18. 18. Review of Product Bids <ul><li>Use Staff Member “group” established to assist with this process </li></ul><ul><ul><li>include high use areas, specialty use areas </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Ensure no conflict of interest issues with group members (see handout #8 “Statement of Full Disclosure”) </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Ensure samples of products are available for review and discussion </li></ul><ul><ul><li>hands on review of products is required to make informed decision </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>have current product samples available to compare </li></ul></ul>
  19. 19. Review of Product Bids (continued) <ul><li>Systematically review all clinical requirements and how well those are met by the vendors ( do not include pricing during this phase - “best product” to be chosen based on meeting clinical needs first) </li></ul><ul><li>Total up non-mandatory scores </li></ul><ul><li>Establish which product best meets clinical needs based on criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Apply % weighting to this product from RFP document </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluate product selection if required </li></ul>
  20. 20. Evaluation Process <ul><li>Select Appropriate Products for Evaluation (based on need, tender) (see handout #9 and #10 “Evaluation Process Model” and “Product and Equipment Review Questions”) </li></ul><ul><li>Write reasonable, obtainable product criteria </li></ul><ul><li>Target appropriate areas in which to try a new product (include them in the criteria development) </li></ul><ul><li>Write Evaluation Criteria that thoroughly encompasses the important points of the product and its function </li></ul><ul><li>Write Evaluation Forms that are easy to utilize and analyze (see handout #11 “Central Venous Catheter Kit Criteria”) </li></ul>
  21. 21. Forming Evaluation Criteria <ul><li>Obtain information from staff members as to the most important factor/function of the desired product </li></ul><ul><li>Organize the product evaluation criteria from start to finish (turning the machine on to turning the machine off - and include everything in between) (see handout #12 and #13 “Neonatal Cardiac Monitor Evaluation” and “Vital Signs Monitor”) </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure that specific considerations related to its use are evaluated (i.e. the acceptable weight of the product if it has to be carried) </li></ul>
  22. 22. Evaluation Criteria Weighting <ul><li>Add weighting factors to those items that are not considered mandatory but are more important than others </li></ul><ul><li>Weigh the specific criteria/function in relation to its importance (scale of 1-10 with 10 being the most important) </li></ul><ul><li>Allow for “comments” to be made in addition to answering specific questions </li></ul><ul><li>Keep questions as simple and low in number as possible to maintain ease of use/completion </li></ul>
  23. 23. Analyzing Evaluation Results <ul><li>Tabulate all answers and number of responses (see handout #14 “Summary Central Venous Catheter Kit”) </li></ul><ul><li>“ Comments” need to be reviewed and added to final analysis as they will many times verify the “numbers” results (see handout #15 Summary Epidural Tray”) </li></ul><ul><li>Apply weighting factor to those questions that have been pre-selected (see handout #16 “Summary Cardiac Electrodes”) </li></ul>
  24. 24. Analyzing Evaluation Results (continued) <ul><li>Organize summary for presentation to staff members involved in the process (keep it simple) </li></ul><ul><li>Allow staff members to review and make a recommendation/decision based on the results </li></ul><ul><li>Document summary and outcome for review with bidding companies </li></ul>
  25. 25. Award of Product <ul><li>Product awarded based on tender results or evaluation process (see handout #17 “Product Award Sheet”) </li></ul><ul><li>Notify companies and allow for ample lead time to stock product </li></ul><ul><li>Education requirement related to product implementation must be addressed before product is implemented </li></ul><ul><li>Changes to policy/practice must be in place </li></ul><ul><li>Important to use up old product before implementing the new (as time will allow) </li></ul>
  26. 26. Award of Product (continued) <ul><li>Communicate decision of product award to all users of current products involved </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure all necessary “parts” have been awarded for use with the product (i.e. disposable associated with equipment) </li></ul><ul><li>Prepare cost analysis related to product award for period of contract term </li></ul><ul><li>Ensure that “alternate” products have also been chosen by this group (i.e. acceptable substitute products if required for backorder situations, manufacturing problems, etc.) </li></ul>
  27. 27. Follow-Up Post Implementation/Award <ul><li>Assemble updated usage and cost information data on products 6 to 12 months post-award </li></ul><ul><li>Communicate with departments using new product/equipment as to satisfaction level </li></ul><ul><li>Clinical Engineering review of awarded equipment (repairs, etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Review findings with Vendor - make any changes as necessary (i.e. number of supplied products/equipment needs to increase) </li></ul>

×