New medical technology challenges the sustainability of healthcare systems in several countries. Drawing on secondary sources of data, the aim of this article is to generate a better understanding of the historical Research & Development dynamics that have contributed to shape today’s medical innovation ecosystem. We describe key technological achievements along three historical periods – the 1950s, the 1980s and the 2000s – and situate them within their broader political, social, cultural and economic contexts. Our analyses bring forward self-reinforcing dynamics between technology, medical specialization, individualization of disease and the concentration of resources in academic teaching centres. We argue that the way medical innovation has been financed, designed and commercialized since the 1950s has engendered path dependency, which exacerbates the sustainability challenges healthcare systems are now facing. We conclude on the need for innovation design principles that could protect the sustainability of healthcare systems.
BaumFEBéginMHouwelingTA. Changes not for the fainthearted: reorienting health care systems toward health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Am J Public Health2009; 99: 1967–1974.
2.
MorlacchiPNelsonRR. How medical practice evolves: Learning to treat failing hearts with an implantable device. Res Policy2001; 40: 511–525.
3.
GelijnsARosenbergN. The dynamics of technological change in medicine. Health Affairs1994; 13: 28–46.
4.
World Health Organization (WHO). Medical devices: managing the mismatch: an outcome of the priority medical devices project. An outcome of the priority medical devices project, Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010.
5.
FongHHarrisE. Technology, innovation and health equity. Bull World Health Organ2015; 93: 438–438A.
6.
LuchetiM. Global health and the 10/09 gap. BJMP2014; 7: a731–a731.
7.
YameyGMorelC. Investing in health innovation: A cornerstone to achieving global health convergence. PLoS Biol2016; 14: e1002389–e1002389.
8.
MacDonnellMDarziA. A key to slower health spending growth worldwide will be unlocking innovation to reduce the labor-intensity of care. Health Aff2013; 32: 653–660.
9.
Rosenberg-YungerZRSDaarASSingerPA. Healthcare sustainability and the challenges of innovation to biopharmaceuticals in Canada. Health Policy2008; 87: 359–368.
10.
Radjou N. Frugal innovation: The engine of sustainable development. How to achieve better health care for more people at lower cost. Reimagining global health: 30 high-impact innovations to save lives. The IC2030 Report, PATH, 2015, p.4.
11.
BreslowL. Health measurement in the third era of health. Am J Public Health2006; 96: 17–19.
12.
Canadian Institute of Health Information (CIHI). Tendances des dépenses nationales de santé, 1975 à 2015, Ottawa, ON: Institut Canadien d’Information sur la Santé, October 2015.
BraudelFWallersteinI. History and the social sciences: The longue durée. Review2009; 32: 171–203.
15.
AbbottA. The system of professions: An essay on the division of expert labor, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
16.
BlumeSS. Insight and industry: On the dynamics of technological change in medicine, Boston: MIT Press, 1992.
17.
WeiszG. The emergence of medical specialization in the nineteenth century. Bull Hist Med2003; 77: 536–574.
18.
PinellP. Héritiers et novateurs: les transformations de l’espace cancer français (1945-1960). Genèses2012; 2: 69–89.
19.
MetcalfeJSJamesAMinaA. Emergent innovation systems and the delivery of clinical services: The case of intra-ocular lenses. Res Policy2005; 34: 1283–1304.
20.
MerrienF-X. L’État-providence, Paris: PUF, 1997.
21.
KuhnleSSanderAThe emergence of the western welfare state. In: CastlesFGLeibfriedSLewisJ (eds). The oxford handbook of welfare state, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 61–80.
22.
Hopkins M and Lazonick W. Who invests in the high-tech knowledge base? Institute for New Economic Thinking. Working Group on the Political Economy of Distribution, Working Paper No. 6, 2014.
23.
GrimaldiRKenneyMSiegelDS. 30 years after the Bayh-Dole: Reassessing academic entrepreneurship. Res Policy2011; 40: 1045–1057.
24.
GrosseSD. Assessing cost-effectiveness in healthcare: history of the $50,000 per QALY threshold. Expert Rev Pharm Outcomes Res2008; 8: 165–178.
25.
SampatBDrummondM. Another special relationship? Interactions between health technology policies and health care systems in the United States and the United Kingdom. J Health Polit Policy Law2011; 36: 119–139.
FichmanRGKohliRKrishnanR. Editorial overview. The role of information systems in healthcare: Current research and future trends. Inf Syst Res2011; 22: 419–428.
28.
WertzDC. Embryo and stem cell research in the USA: A political history. Trends Mol Med2002; 8: 143–146.
29.
MartinoOIWardDJPackerC. Innovation and the burden of disease: retrospective observational study of new and emerging health technologies reported by the EuroScan network from 2000 to 2009. Value Health2012; 15: 376–380.
30.
WinterYOertelWHDodelR. Is there underfunding in brain research? The UK research expenditure. Eur J Neurol2012; 19: 4–5.
31.
WardDMartinoOPackerC. Burden of disease, research funding and innovation in the UK: Do new health technologies reflect research inputs and need?J Health Serv Res Policy2013; 18(1 suppl): 7–13.
Williams-JonesB. ‘Be ready against cancer, now’: direct-to-consumer advertising for genetic testing. New Genet Soc2006; 25: 89–107.
34.
Williams-JonesB. History of a gene patent: tracing the development and application of commercial BRCA testing. Health Law J2002; 10: 123–146.
35.
LazonickWTulumO. US biopharmaceutical finance and the sustainability of the biotech business model. Res Policy2011; 40: 1170–1187.
36.
LazonickWMazzucatoM. The risk-reward nexus in the innovation-inequality relationship: who takes the risks? Who gets the rewards?Ind Corp Change2013; 22: 1093–1128.
37.
FariaAPBarbosaN. Does venture capital really foster innovation?Econ Lett2014; 122: 129–131.
38.
LehouxPMillerFADaudelinG. How venture capital decide which new medical technologies come to exist?Sci Public Policy2016, pp. 43: 375–385.
FlemingJJ. The decline of venture capital investment in early-stage life sciences poses a challenge to continued innovation. Health Aff2015; 34: 271–276.
41.
IlincaSHamerSBotjeD. All you need to know about innovation in healthcare: The 10 best reads. Int J Healthcare Manage2013; 5: 193–202.
42.
AschDAVolppKG. What business are we in? The emergence of health as the business of health care. New Eng J Med2012; 367: 888–889.
43.
GetzLKirkengenALUlvestadE. The human biology-saturated with experience. Tidsskr Nor Legeforen2011; 131: 683–687.
44.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Main Science and Technology Indicators, http://www.oecd.org/sti/msti.htm (2016, accessed 21 March 2016).
45.
HoffmanSG. The new tools of the science trade: Contested knowledge production and the conceptual vocabularies of academic capitalism. Social Anthropol2011; 19: 439–462.
