Dowie J
Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.
J Health Serv Res Policy. 1996 Apr;1(2):104-13. doi: 10.1177/135581969600100208.
Three broad movements are seeking to change the world of medicine. The proponents of 'evidence-based medicine' are mainly concerned with ensuring that strategies of proven clinical effectiveness are adopted. Health economists are mainly concerned to establish that 'cost-effectiveness' and not 'clinical effectiveness' is the criterion used in determining option selection. A variety of patient support and public interest groups, including many health economists, are mainly concerned with ensuring that patient and public preferences drive clinical and policy decisions. This paper argues that decision analysis based medical decision making (DABMDM) constitutes the pre-requisite for the widespread introduction of the main principles embodied in evidence-based medicine, cost-effective medicine and preference-driven medicine; that, in the light of current modes of practice, seeking to promote these principles without a prior or simultaneous move to DABMDM is equivalent to asking the cart to move without the horse; and that in fact DABMDM subsumes and enjoins the valuable aspects of all three. Particular attention is paid to differentiating between DABMDM and EBM, by way of analysis of various expositions of EBM and examination of two recent empirical studies. EBM, as so far expounded, reflects a problem-solving attitude that results in a heavy concentration on RCTs and meta-analyses, rather than a broad decision making focus that concentrates on meeting all the requirements of a good clinical decision. The latter include: ensuring that inferences from RCTs and meta-analyses to individual patients (or patient groups) are made explicitly; paying equally serious attention to evidence on values and costs as to clinical evidence; and accepting the inadequacy of 'taking into account and bearing in mind' as a way of integrating the multiple and distinct elements of a decision.
有三大运动正试图改变医学领域。“循证医学”的支持者主要关注确保采用已证实具有临床疗效的策略。卫生经济学家主要关注确立“成本效益”而非“临床疗效”是决定选择方案时所使用的标准。包括许多卫生经济学家在内的各种患者支持团体和公共利益团体,主要关注确保患者和公众的偏好能够推动临床和政策决策。本文认为,基于决策分析的医学决策制定(DABMDM)是广泛引入循证医学、成本效益医学和偏好驱动医学所体现的主要原则的先决条件;鉴于当前的实践模式,在没有事先或同时转向DABMDM的情况下试图推广这些原则,就如同让马车在没有马的情况下移动;事实上,DABMDM包含并结合了这三者的宝贵方面。通过对循证医学的各种阐述进行分析以及对两项近期实证研究进行考察,本文特别关注区分DABMDM和循证医学。到目前为止所阐述的循证医学反映了一种解决问题的态度,这种态度导致高度集中于随机对照试验(RCTs)和荟萃分析,而不是一种广泛的决策制定重点,即专注于满足良好临床决策的所有要求。后者包括:确保明确从RCTs和荟萃分析到个体患者(或患者群体)的推断;对价值和成本证据与临床证据给予同样认真的关注;以及认识到“考虑到并牢记”作为整合决策中多个不同要素的方式是不够的。