A comparative analysis of a disposable and a reusable pedicle screw instrument kit for lumbar arthrodesis: integrating HTA and MCDA

Table 4 Schematic representation of the priorities and scores (base, normalized and final)

Priority	Normalized priority	Dimensions	Specific dimensions	Base score		Score	Incidence	Normalized score		Final score
Priority	Normalized priority	Dimensions	Specific dimensions	Reusable	Disposable	MAX	(%)	Reusable	Disposable	Reusable	Disposable
1	0.222	Effectiveness (practical research)		2	2	4	100	0.50	0.50
1	0.222	Total		4				0.50	0.50	0.11	0.11
2	0.194		Process analysis	2	2	4	36	0.18	0.18
		Economic and financial impact	CEA	1	2	3	27	0.09	0.18
			BIA	2	2	4	36	0.18	0.18
		Total		11				0.45	0.55	0.09	0.11
3	0.167	Patient safety		1	2	3	100	0.33	0.67
3	0.167	Total		3				0.33	0.67	0.06	0.11
4	0.139		Quantitative	1	2	3	50	0.17	0.33
		Organizational impact	Qualitative	1	2	3	50	0.17	0.33
		Total		6				0.33	0.67	0.05	0.09
5	0.111		Scientific papers quality	1	1	2	10	0.05	0.05
			Description of the technology	1	2	3	15	0.05	0.10
			Description of the pathology	2	2	4	20	0.10	0.10
		General relevance	Real and potential audience	2	2	4	20	0.10	0.10
			Goals (agreement with company strategy)	1	2	3	15	0.05	0.10
			Potential benefits	2	2	4	20	0.10	0.10
		Total		20				0.45	0.55	0.05	0.06
6	0.083	Legal aspects		1	1	2	100	0.50	0.50
6	0.083	Total		2				0.50	0.50	0.04	0.04
7	0.056		Ethical impact	1	2	3	50	0.17	0.33
		Social and ethical impact	Social impact	2	1	3	50	0.33	0.17
		Total		6				0.50	0.50	0.03	0.03
8	0.028	Equity		2	2	4	100	0.50	0.50
8	0.028	Total		4				0.50	0.50	0.01	0.01
		FINAL SCORE								0.43	0.57

ISSN: 2191-1991