Based on the needs assessment of the medical and non-medical departments, the Investment Committee of the Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), a teaching hospital in Brazil, recommends on which technologies the limited financial resources should be invested. Technology inclusion requests are evaluated by the hospital's technology assessment unit. For technology replacement, we have found models to assess the criticality of medical equipment, but they were insufficient to support the decision, which involves all departments of our hospital. This study aimed to develop an automated tool to support decision making regarding investments in equipment replacement in the hospital.

A working group was set up with professionals from healthcare administration, clinical engineering and research departments. From the hospital's inventory database, we developed the tool using Google SheetsR. We have defined three departments for pilot testing of the tool: hemodynamics, laundry, and basic research. These departments represent the areas of healthcare, support services, and teaching and research in the hospital.

The criticality of medical equipment is assessed based on the criteria of function, physical risk, impact, remaining equipment life cycle, intensity of use and number of corrective maintenance actions performed. For the equipment in the administrative, support and research areas, the function and physical risk criteria were replaced by the safety and by the risks to the quality of service criteria. The evaluation is carried out by a multidisciplinary team. The tool categorizes the equipment into low, medium and high criticality.

The tool prioritized the equipment based on objective criteria evaluated by the departments’ multidisciplinary team comprising experts who use the equipment in their activities, the department administrator and clinical engineers, and provided transparency regarding the decision-making of the hospital's Investment Committee. In 2019, the limited financial resources were invested only in the replacement of highly critical equipment. We believe the tool can be reproduced in hospitals in low and middle-income countries.

The Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre (HCPA), a public teaching hospital, has a Hospital-based Health Technology Assessment (HB-HTA) unit to support the decision-making process on technology incorporation, rationalization or disinvestment. In 2017, the plastic adhesive drape was standardized at HCPA for use in cardiovascular, digestive, orthopedic, and neurological surgery for the purpose of preventing surgical site infection (SSI). This study evaluated whether the plastic adhesive drape technology is more effective than the no adhesive drapes in the surgical procedures in which it is used in the HCPA, so as to support the medical board's decision regarding the rationalization of use.

The primary outcome was the surgical site infection rate (SSI). Searches were performed in PubMed, Cochrane and national and international health agencies: World Health Organization (WHO), National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), Brazilian National Commission for the Incorporation of Technologies (CONITEC) and Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency (ANVISA) databases. The search strategy combined terms related to the technology and types of surgery in which it is used in the HCPA. The quality of the included studies was assessed. Additionally, data on technology utilization and costs in the hospital were analyzed.

Technology assessment followed AdHopHTA project recommendations. Data from the hospital showed that the technology has been used in fifteen surgical specialties, different from the proposed incorporation, with a progressive increase in consumption from 2017 to 2018. The literature review included a systematic review with seven clinical trials, which concluded that the plastic adhesive drape lacks benefits, with potential for increased risk of SSI. The evidence was of moderate quality.

The expenses associated with the use of the technology were considered unjustified as it is not reimbursed by the Brazilian Ministry of Health and its disinvestment was recommended. The Medical Board approved the disinvestment of the technology based on the evidence found by the HB-HTA unit, and the medical staff complied with the decision.

In Brazil, cardiovascular disease accounted for twenty-eight percent of deaths in 2013 with an estimated prevalence of five to eight in adults over forty years of age. Health care costs have quadrupled in the last decade, reaching USD 125 billion in 2013, of which forty-four percent were paid by the public system. The objective of this study was to estimate the direct costs associated with inpatient stay for myocardial infarction in a public teaching hospital from the perspective of the service provider.

We used a bottom up microcosting methodology for collecting data from computerized hospital records and patients' hospital bills. The costs included salaries of health professionals, medications, consumables, laboratory and diagnostic tests performed during hospitalization and maintenance expenses. Mean, standard-deviation, median and total costs were calculated. The costs were presented as mean and median values in Brazilian currency and converted to US dollars by the exchange rate.

A total of eighty-one patients were included in this study. The mean population age was 60 ± 10.6 years, the follow-up period were 107 ± 2.6 months; fifty-four percent were male, eighty-four percent had hypertension, thirty-six percent had diabetes, and twelve percent had previous cerebrovascular accident. During follow-up, there were 101 hospitalizations for myocardial infarction, of which fifty-seven with intensive care unit (ICU) days. The total cost with hospitalizations was USD 177,288, of which fifty-two percent were the health professionals’ costs. The average cost for hospitalization was USD 1,755 (median USD 1,221). However, the average reimbursement paid by the public system was USD 1,188 (median USD 1,044) per hospitalization, generating a deficit of thirty-two percent for the hospital.

These results may indicate the necessity of reviewing the public reimbursement policies for the service providers in Brazil. Besides that, these data may also serve as input for the economic evaluation in coronary artery disease.