Suppr超能文献

安大略省新癌症药物优先级设定决策对肿瘤内科医生临床实践的影响:一项定性研究

The effect of priority setting decisions for new cancer drugs on medical oncologists' practice in Ontario: a qualitative study.

作者信息

Berry Scott R, Hubay Stacey, Soibelman Hagit, Martin Douglas K

机构信息

Division of Medical Oncology/Hematology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

出版信息

BMC Health Serv Res. 2007 Nov 28;7:193. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-7-193.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Health care policies, including drug-funding policies, influence physician practice. Funding policies are especially important in the area of cancer care since cancer is a leading cause of death that is responsible for a significant level of health care expenditures. Recognizing the rising cost of cancer therapies, Cancer Care Ontario (CCO) established a funding process to provide access to new, effective agents through a "New Drug Funding Program" (NDFP). The purpose of this study is to describe oncologists' perceptions of the impact of NDFP priority setting decisions on their practice.

METHODS

This is a qualitative study involving semi-structured, in-depth interviews with 46 medical oncologists in Ontario. Oncologists were asked to describe the impact of CCO's NDFP drug funding decisions on their practice. Analysis of interview transcripts commenced with data collection.

RESULTS

Our key finding is that many of the medical oncologists who participated in this study did not accept limits when policy decisions limit access to cancer drugs they feel would benefit their patients. Moreover, overcoming those limits had a significant impact on oncologists' practice in terms of how they spend their time and energy and their relationship with patients.

CONCLUSION

When priority setting decisions limit access to cancer medications, many oncologists' efforts to overcome those limits have a significant impact on their practice. Policy makers need to seriously consider the implications of their decisions on physicians, who may go to considerable effort to circumvent their policies in the name of patient advocacy.

摘要

背景

包括药物资助政策在内的医疗保健政策会影响医生的行医方式。资助政策在癌症护理领域尤为重要,因为癌症是主要的死亡原因,导致了大量的医疗保健支出。鉴于癌症治疗成本不断上升,安大略癌症护理组织(CCO)制定了一个资助流程,通过“新药资助计划”(NDFP)让患者能够使用新的、有效的药物。本研究的目的是描述肿瘤学家对NDFP优先级设定决策对其行医方式影响的看法。

方法

这是一项定性研究,对安大略省的46名医学肿瘤学家进行了半结构化的深入访谈。肿瘤学家被要求描述CCO的NDFP药物资助决策对其行医方式的影响。访谈记录的分析从数据收集开始。

结果

我们的主要发现是,参与本研究的许多医学肿瘤学家在政策决策限制他们认为对患者有益的癌症药物的获取时,并不接受这些限制。此外,克服这些限制在肿瘤学家如何花费时间和精力以及他们与患者的关系方面对其行医方式产生了重大影响。

结论

当优先级设定决策限制癌症药物的获取时,许多肿瘤学家为克服这些限制所做的努力对其行医方式产生了重大影响。政策制定者需要认真考虑他们的决策对医生的影响,医生可能会以患者权益倡导者的名义付出巨大努力来规避他们的政策。

相似文献

3
Rationing cancer treatment: a qualitative study of perceptions of legitimate limit-setting.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 May 9;18(1):342. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3137-3.
4
Clinician Perspectives of COVID-19-Related Cancer Drug Funding Measures in Ontario.
Curr Oncol. 2021 Feb 26;28(2):1056-1066. doi: 10.3390/curroncol28020103.
5
Attitude of Iranian Medical Oncologists Toward Economic Aspects, and Policy-making in Relation to New Cancer Drugs.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015 Oct 20;5(2):99-105. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2015.186.
6
Oncologists' End of Life Treatment Decisions.
J Appl Gerontol. 2017 Apr;36(4):416-440. doi: 10.1177/0733464815595510. Epub 2016 Jul 9.
7
Medical Oncology Professionals' Perceptions of Telehealth Video Visits.
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jan 4;4(1):e2033967. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.33967.
8
Oncologists' Views on Using Value to Guide Cancer Treatment Decisions.
Value Health. 2018 Aug;21(8):931-937. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2018.01.005. Epub 2018 Mar 24.
9
Oncologists' Perceptions of Drug Affordability Using NCCN Evidence Blocks: Results from a National Survey.
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018 Jun;24(6):565-571. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2018.17449. Epub 2018 Feb 16.
10
Do oncologists believe new cancer drugs offer good value?
Oncologist. 2006 Feb;11(2):90-5. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.11-2-90.

引用本文的文献

1
Analysis of drug pricing drivers under South Korea's pharmaco-economic evaluation exemption policy (2015-2022).
Front Pharmacol. 2025 Jan 7;15:1519491. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1519491. eCollection 2024.
2
Current Attitudes toward Unfunded Cancer Therapies among Canadian Medical Oncologists.
Curr Oncol. 2021 Nov 16;28(6):4748-4755. doi: 10.3390/curroncol28060400.
3
Moral Distress and Resilience Associated with Cancer Care Priority Setting in a Resource-Limited Context.
Oncologist. 2021 Jul;26(7):e1189-e1196. doi: 10.1002/onco.13818. Epub 2021 May 28.
4
Rationing cancer treatment: a qualitative study of perceptions of legitimate limit-setting.
BMC Health Serv Res. 2018 May 9;18(1):342. doi: 10.1186/s12913-018-3137-3.
6
Attitude of Iranian Medical Oncologists Toward Economic Aspects, and Policy-making in Relation to New Cancer Drugs.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2015 Oct 20;5(2):99-105. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2015.186.
7
Overcoming obstacles in accessing unfunded oral chemotherapy: physician experience and challenges.
J Oncol Pract. 2013 Jul;9(4):188-93. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2012.000680. Epub 2013 Jan 2.
8
Less than ideal: how oncologists practice with limited drug access.
J Oncol Pract. 2012 May;8(3):190-5. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2011.000337. Epub 2012 Jan 10.
9
Variation and consternation: access to unfunded cancer drugs in Canada.
J Oncol Pract. 2012 Jan;8(1):35-9. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2011.000278.

本文引用的文献

2
Communication skills in palliative care: a practical guide.
Neurol Clin. 2001 Nov;19(4):989-1004. doi: 10.1016/s0733-8619(05)70057-8.
3
Priority-setting decisions for new cancer drugs: a qualitative case study.
Lancet. 2001 Nov 17;358(9294):1676-81. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06714-9.
4
Funding new cancer drugs in Ontario: closing the loop in the practice guidelines development cycle.
J Clin Oncol. 2001 Jul 15;19(14):3392-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.14.3392.
6
Priority setting for new technologies in medicine: qualitative case study.
BMJ. 2000 Nov 25;321(7272):1316-8. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1316.
7
Accountability for reasonableness.
BMJ. 2000 Nov 25;321(7272):1300-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7272.1300.
8
SPIKES-A six-step protocol for delivering bad news: application to the patient with cancer.
Oncologist. 2000;5(4):302-11. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.5-4-302.
9
Caring and cost: the challenge for physician advocacy.
Ann Intern Med. 2000 Jul 18;133(2):148-53. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-133-2-200007180-00014.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验