Suppr超能文献

谁来做评估?第三方技术评估在卫生系统决策中对卫生技术筹资的作用。

Who does the numbers? The role of third-party technology assessment to inform health systems' decision-making about the funding of health technologies.

机构信息

Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Value Health. 2009 Mar-Apr;12(2):193-201. doi: 10.1111/j.1524-4733.2008.00441.x. Epub 2008 Jul 12.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing number of health-care systems using economic evaluations to inform decisions about the reimbursement of health technologies. There are usually two separate elements of this process: assembling relevant evidence and undertaking analyses (technology assessment), and decision-making. In most systems, technology assessment is undertaken by the manufacturer of the technology. In a few, "third-party" assessment is used.

METHODS

In the United Kingdom, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence used a combination of third-party and manufacturer assessments between 1999 and 2005. After this point, a Single Technology Appraisal program (using manufacturer-based assessment) was instituted for some technologies. Here the role of third-party assessment is considered in this from of decision-making. The article reviews the requirements of economic evaluation to support decision-making, and considers the extent to which each type of assessment is likely to meet these requirements. It also attempts to address whether the two forms of assessment differ in their impact on decision-making using a comparison of the decisions made by National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (under its multiple-technology appraisal system) and the Scottish Medicines Consortium (SMC), which relies on manufacturer assessment.

RESULTS

The comparison is limited by the small number of technologies considered by both bodies. Nevertheless, it suggests that there are potentially important differences between the two bodies, with NICE generally placing more restrictions of the use of technologies.

CONCLUSIONS

The article concludes that there are potential advantages to third-party assessment, but its cost and timing may preclude its use for all new technologies. A hybrid arrangement is suggested where third-party assessment is used in particular circumstances.

摘要

背景

越来越多的医疗保健系统使用经济评估来为健康技术的报销决策提供信息。这个过程通常有两个独立的部分:收集相关证据并进行分析(技术评估),以及决策。在大多数系统中,技术评估由技术制造商进行。在少数情况下,使用“第三方”评估。

方法

在英国,国家卫生与临床优化研究所(National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence,NICE)在 1999 年至 2005 年期间结合使用了第三方和制造商评估。在此之后,为一些技术制定了单一技术评估计划(使用基于制造商的评估)。在这里,考虑了这种决策形式中的第三方评估的作用。本文回顾了支持决策的经济评估要求,并考虑了每种评估类型在多大程度上可能满足这些要求。它还试图通过比较 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence(NICE)(在其多技术评估系统下)和苏格兰药品咨询委员会(Scottish Medicines Consortium,SMC)的决策,来解决这两种评估形式在决策中的影响是否存在差异,SMC 依赖制造商评估。

结果

由于两个机构考虑的技术数量较少,因此比较受到限制。尽管如此,它表明这两个机构之间存在潜在的重要差异,NICE 通常对技术的使用施加更多限制。

结论

本文的结论是,第三方评估具有潜在优势,但由于其成本和时间限制,可能无法将其用于所有新技术。建议采用混合安排,在特定情况下使用第三方评估。

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