• IMA sites
  • IMAJ services
  • IMA journals
  • Follow us
  • Alternate Text Alternate Text
עמוד בית
Thu, 21.11.24

Search results


February 2024
Shani Ben Shetrit LLB LLM MA, Jamal Daghash MD, Daniel Sperling SJD BA (Philosophy)

In recent years, we have been experiencing a technological revolution, which signifies an ethical and societal transformation. Artificial intelligence (AI) based technologies have gradually permeated all aspects of life and solidified their position. Within this context, the emergence of these technologies offers new opportunities in the medical field, including palliative care, which is aimed at alleviating suffering and improving the quality of life for terminally ill patients and their families. In Israel, the Dying Patient Act of 2005 (the law), which promotes values such as the sanctity of life and individual autonomy, allows terminally ill patients to determine their preferred treatment, and withhold life-saving treatment under certain circumstances. The law represents a significant step toward improving care for terminally ill patients, reducing pain and suffering, and respecting the patient's wishes and worldviews in their final days. However, the practical implementation of the law has encountered numerous challenges, ranging from lack of familiarity among doctors and healthcare professionals and the requirement to determining life expectancy to fulfilling the law's purpose. These challenges are associated with ethical, cultural, and religious perspectives. In this article, we describe how AI-based technologies hold immense potential in applying the law and providing palliative care based on their predictive capabilities, prognostic accuracy, and optimization of treatment as well as communication between patients and healthcare providers. However, as an innovative, developing, and complex technology, it is crucial not to overlook the ethical, societal, and legal challenges inherent in implementing and using AI-based technologies in the context of palliative care.

July 2011
Y. Folman and S. Shabat

Background: Cement vertebroplasty has been performed for over a decade to treat painful osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures (OVCFs). Kyphoplasty is considered a further step in the evolution of vertebral augmentation.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficiency and safety of the Confidence Vertebroplasty (CV) system in comparison with the Sky Kyphoplasty (SK) system in treating OVCF.

Methods: This prospective study included 45 patients with OVCF. Fourteen were treated with CV[1] and 31 with SK[2]. An imaging evaluation using a compression ratio (height of anterior vs. posterior wall) and local kyphotic deformity (Cobb angle) was performed prior to the procedure and 12 months later. Evaluation of pain was carried out using a visual analogue scale.

Results: The mean compression repair was 12% in the CV group compared to 25% in the SK group.

Mean kyphotic deformity restoration achieved using CV was 41% compared to 67% using SK. In both groups the pain severity was equally reduced by a mean of 43%.

Conclusions: The SK system has a technical superiority in restoring the vertebral height and repairing the kyphotic deformity, an advantage that was not manifested in pain relief – the most important variable. Both systems have a high level of safety. The cost-benefit balance clearly favors the CV system.






[1] CV = Confidence Vertebroplasty



[2] SK = Sky Kyphoplasty


October 2007
H. Ring, O. Keren, M. Zwecker and A. Dynia

Background: With the development of computer technology and the high-tech electronic industry over the past 30 years, the technological age is flourishing. New technologies are continually being introduced, but questions regarding the economic viability of these technologies should be addressed.

Objectives: To identify the medical technologies that are currently in use in different rehabilitation medicine settings in Israel

Methods: The TECHNO-R 2005 survey was conducted in two phases. Beginning in 2004, the first survey used a questionnaire with open questions relating to the different technologies in clinical use, including questions on their purpose, who operates the device (technician, physiotherapist, occupational therapist, physician, etc.), and a description of the treated patients. This questionnaire was sent to 31 rehabilitation medicine facilities in Israel. Due to difficulties in comprehension of the term “technology,” a second revised standardized questionnaire with closed-ended questions specifying diverse technologies was introduced in 2005. The responder had to mark from a list of 15 different medical technologies which were in use in his or her facility, as well as their purpose, who operates the device, and a description of the treated patients.

Results: Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation, the TILT bed, continuous passive movement, and therapeutic ultrasound were the most widely used technologies in rehabilitation medicine facilities. Monitoring of the sitting position in the wheelchair, at the bottom of the list, was found to be the least used technology (with 15.4% occurrence). Most of the technologies are used primarily for treatment purposes and to a lesser degree for diagnosis and research.

Conclusions: Our study poses a fundamental semantic and conceptual question regarding what kind of technologies are or should be part of the standard equipment of any accredited rehabilitation medicine facility for assessment, treatment and/or research. For this purpose, additional data are needed.
 

February 2005
A. Seifan and J. Shemer

Innovation in medical science is progressing at a rapid pace. As a result, new medical technologies that offer to improve upon or completely replace existing alternatives are continually appearing. These technologies – which include pharmaceuticals, devices, equipment, supplies, medical and surgical procedures, and administrative and support systems – are changing the way medicine can be practiced and delivered, forcing healthcare providers and policymakers to consistently evaluate and adapt to new treatment options. Meanwhile, society is becoming more demanding of new medical technologies. Emerging medical technology, however, has been viewed as a significant factor in increasing the cost of healthcare. The abundance of new medical alternatives, combined with scarcity of resources, has led to priority setting, rationing and the need for more technology management and assessment. Economic evaluation of medical technologies is a system of analysis used to formally compare the costs and consequences of alternative healthcare interventions. EEMT[1] can be used by many healthcare entities, including national policymakers, manufacturers, payers and providers as a tool to aid in resource allocation decisions. This paper discusses the four current popular methodologies for EEMT (cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility), and describes the industry environment that has shaped their development.


 




[1] EEMT = economic evaluation of medical technologies


A. Seifan and J. Shemer
Innovation in medical science is progressing at a rapid pace. As a result, new medical technologies that offer to improve upon or completely replace existing alternatives are continually appearing. These technologies – which include pharmaceuticals, devices, equipment, supplies, medical and surgical procedures, and administrative and support systems – are changing the way medicine can be practiced and delivered, forcing healthcare providers and policymakers to consistently evaluate and adapt to new treatment options. Meanwhile, society is becoming more demanding of new medical technologies. Emerging medical technology, however, has been viewed as a significant factor in increasing the cost of healthcare. The abundance of new medical alternatives, combined with scarcity of resources, has led to priority setting, rationing and the need for more technology management and assessment. Economic evaluation of medical technologies is a system of analysis used to formally compare the costs and consequences of alternative healthcare interventions. EEMT[1] can be used by many healthcare entities, including national policymakers, manufacturers, payers and providers as a tool to aid in resource allocation decisions. This paper discusses the four current popular methodologies for EEMT (cost-minimization, cost-benefit, cost-effectiveness and cost-utility), and describes the industry environment that has shaped their development






[1] EEMT = economic evaluation of medical technologies


November 2001
Edna Katz, MD, Luis Gaitini, MD, Mostafa Samri, MD, Nachum Egoz, MD, PhD, Dean Fergusson, MHA and Andreas Laupacis, MD, MSc

Background: Concern about the side effects of allogeneic blood transfusion has led to an increased interest in methods of minimizing peri-operative transfusion. Technologies to minimize allogeneic transfusion include drugs such as aprotinin, desmopressin, tranexamic acid and erythropoietin, and techniques such as acute normovolemic hemodilution, cell salvage and autologous pre-donation.

Objective: To survey the current use in Israel of these seven technologies used to minimize allogeneic blood transfusion.

Methods: Our survey was conducted in 1996–97 in all hospitals in Israel with more than 50 beds and at least one of the following departments: cardiac or vascular surgery, orthopedics, or urology. All departments surveyed were asked: a) whether the technologies were currently being used or not, b) the degree of use, and c) the factors influencing their use and non-use. The survey was targeted at the heads of these departments.

Results: Pharmaceuticals to reduce allogeneic blood transfusion were used in a much higher proportion in cardiac surgery departments than in the other three departments. Pre-operative blood donation was used in few of the cardiac, urologic and vascular surgery departments compared to its moderate use in orthopedic departments. The use of acute normovolemic hemodilution was reported in a majority of the cardiac departments only. Moderate use of cell salvage was reported in all departments except urology where it was not used at all.

Conclusion: There is considerable practice variation in the use of technologies to minimize exposure to peri-operative allogeneic blood transfusion in Israel.
 

Legal Disclaimer: The information contained in this website is provided for informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal or medical advice on any matter.
The IMA is not responsible for and expressly disclaims liability for damages of any kind arising from the use of or reliance on information contained within the site.
© All rights to information on this site are reserved and are the property of the Israeli Medical Association. Privacy policy

2 Twin Towers, 35 Jabotinsky, POB 4292, Ramat Gan 5251108 Israel