Williams Iestyn P, Bryan Stirling
The Health Services Management Centre, University of Birmingham, Park House Birmingham, 40 Edgbaston Park Road, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2RT, UK.
Soc Sci Med. 2007 Nov;65(10):2116-29. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.06.009. Epub 2007 Aug 14.
In a context of rapid technological advances in health care and increasing demand for expensive treatments, local formulary committees are key players in the management of scarce resources. However, little is known about the information and processes used when making decisions on the inclusion of new treatments. This paper reports research on the use of economic evaluations in technology coverage decisions in England, although the findings have a relevance to other health care systems with devolved responsibility for resource allocation. It reports a study of four local formulary committees in which both qualitative and quantitative data were collected. Our main research finding is that it is an exception for cost-effectiveness analysis to inform technology coverage decisions. Barriers to use include access and expertise levels, concerns relating to the independence of analyses and problems with implementation of study recommendations. Further barriers derive from the constraints on decision makers, a lack of clarity over functions and aims of local committees, and the challenge of disinvestment in medical technologies. The relative weakness of the research-practice dynamics in this context suggests the need for a rethinking of the role of both analysts and decision makers. Our research supports the view that in order to be useful, analysis needs to better reflect the constraints of the local decision-making environment. We also recommend that local decision-making committees and bodies in the National Health Service more clearly identify the 'problems' which they are charged with solving and how their outputs contribute to broader finance and commissioning functions. This would help to establish the ways in which the routine use of cost-effectiveness analysis might become a reality.
在医疗保健技术迅速发展以及对昂贵治疗的需求不断增加的背景下,地方药品目录委员会是稀缺资源管理的关键参与者。然而,对于在决定纳入新治疗方法时所使用的信息和流程,我们知之甚少。本文报告了关于在英格兰技术覆盖决策中使用经济评估的研究,尽管研究结果与其他对资源分配负有下放责任的医疗保健系统相关。它报告了对四个地方药品目录委员会的研究,在该研究中收集了定性和定量数据。我们的主要研究发现是,成本效益分析为技术覆盖决策提供信息是个例外。使用的障碍包括获取途径和专业水平、对分析独立性的担忧以及研究建议实施方面的问题。进一步的障碍源于对决策者的限制、地方委员会职能和目标缺乏明确性,以及医疗技术撤资的挑战。在这种情况下研究与实践动态的相对薄弱表明需要重新思考分析师和决策者的角色。我们的研究支持这样一种观点,即要发挥作用,分析需要更好地反映地方决策环境的限制。我们还建议国家医疗服务体系中的地方决策委员会和机构更明确地确定他们负责解决的“问题”以及他们的产出如何有助于更广泛的财务和委托职能。这将有助于确定成本效益分析的常规使用可能成为现实的方式。