Walker Simon, Palmer Stephen, Sculpher Mark
Centre for Health Economics, University of York, Heslington, UK.
Br Med Bull. 2007;81-82:51-64. doi: 10.1093/bmb/ldm007. Epub 2007 Apr 4.
This article examines the role of National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) technology appraisal in detail, focussing on the process itself and the methods used to establish cost-effective practices for the National Health Service (NHS).
Approaches to identifying both effective and cost-effective practices have become central to rationing decisions in the NHS. The establishment of the NICE, which produces guidance on what treatments should be provided by the NHS, represents the most visible approach to introducing economic considerations into these decisions.
The decisions over which activities will be displaced by NICE approved treatments are made at a local level, while the cost-effectiveness threshold used to evaluate technologies is set nationally. This may result in treatments being displaced which are more cost-effective than those being introduced. AREAS TO DEVELOP RESEARCH: The introduction of programmes looking at disinvestment opportunities to help aid local decision makers is a key step in improving the allocation of NHS resources and removing geographical inequalities.
本文详细探讨了英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)技术评估的作用,重点关注评估过程本身以及为英国国家医疗服务体系(NHS)确立具有成本效益的医疗实践所采用的方法。
确定有效且具有成本效益的医疗实践的方法已成为NHS资源分配决策的核心。NICE的设立为NHS应提供何种治疗提供指导,这是将经济因素纳入这些决策的最显著方式。
NICE批准的治疗将取代哪些医疗活动的决策在地方层面做出,而用于评估技术的成本效益阈值则在全国范围内设定。这可能导致被取代的治疗比引入的治疗更具成本效益。
引入旨在寻找撤资机会以帮助地方决策者的项目,是改善NHS资源分配并消除地域不平等的关键一步。