Suppr超能文献

以色列普通民众对阿尔茨海默病优先排序标准的看法。

Israeli lay persons' views on priority-setting criteria for Alzheimer's disease.

作者信息

Werner Perla

机构信息

Department of Gerontology, Faculty of Social Welfare and Health Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2009 Jun;12(2):187-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00523.x. Epub 2009 Mar 23.

Abstract

AIM

The aim of this study was to assess Israeli lay persons' preferences for setting priorities for the care of Alzheimer's disease (AD).

BACKGROUND

As the knowledge about AD accumulates, and especially as more therapeutic and non-therapeutic interventions for its early diagnosis and treatment are developed, health-care costs associated with the disease rise dramatically. Therefore, setting priorities for funding these therapies, as well as other costs associated with AD is becoming an increasingly complex need.

METHODS

A convenience sample of 624 community-dwelling men and women participated in the study (mean age = 49, range = 20-90). Participants were asked how strongly they agreed or disagreed with 18 criteria that would be used to set priorities for the allocation of resources in the area of AD.

RESULTS

High-weight criteria included being a life-threatening condition and the benefit of treatment. Average-weight criteria included the severity of the disease, treatment costs and equity of access. The age of the patient also was highly rated. All other patient-related criteria were rated as low. Value orientations and education were the main variables associated with participants' preferences.

CONCLUSIONS

The lay public seems to endorse a multi-criteria decision process for the allocation of resources in the area of AD. Similar to other diseases--disease-related criteria were highly preferred. These preferences should be compared with those of other stakeholders such as clinicians and policy makers.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估以色列普通民众对确定阿尔茨海默病(AD)护理优先级的偏好。

背景

随着对AD的认识不断积累,尤其是随着更多用于其早期诊断和治疗的治疗性和非治疗性干预措施的开发,与该疾病相关的医疗保健成本急剧上升。因此,确定为这些治疗以及与AD相关的其他成本提供资金的优先级正成为一项日益复杂的需求。

方法

一个由624名社区居民男女组成的便利样本参与了该研究(平均年龄 = 49岁,范围 = 20 - 90岁)。参与者被问及他们对用于确定AD领域资源分配优先级的18条标准的同意或不同意程度。

结果

高权重标准包括危及生命的状况和治疗益处。中等权重标准包括疾病严重程度、治疗成本和获得治疗的公平性。患者年龄也被高度重视。所有其他与患者相关的标准被评为低权重。价值取向和教育程度是与参与者偏好相关的主要变量。

结论

普通公众似乎支持在AD领域进行资源分配的多标准决策过程。与其他疾病类似,与疾病相关的标准备受青睐。这些偏好应与临床医生和政策制定者等其他利益相关者的偏好进行比较。

相似文献

1
Israeli lay persons' views on priority-setting criteria for Alzheimer's disease.
Health Expect. 2009 Jun;12(2):187-96. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00523.x. Epub 2009 Mar 23.
3
Lay person's recommendations about interventions for Alzheimer's disease: correlates and relationship to help-seeking behavior.
Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen. 2004 Sep-Oct;19(5):309-15. doi: 10.1177/153331750401900512.
4
Gender differences in lay persons' beliefs and knowledge about Alzheimer's disease (AD): a national representative study of Israeli adults.
Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2013 Mar-Apr;56(2):400-4. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2012.11.001. Epub 2012 Dec 6.
5
Criteria for priority-setting in health care in Uganda: exploration of stakeholders' values.
Bull World Health Organ. 2004 Mar;82(3):172-9. Epub 2004 Apr 16.
7
Eliciting public preferences for healthcare: a systematic review of techniques.
Health Technol Assess. 2001;5(5):1-186. doi: 10.3310/hta5050.
8
Do the equity-efficiency preferences of the Israeli Basket Committee match those of Israeli health policy makers?
Isr J Health Policy Res. 2017 Apr 30;6:20. doi: 10.1186/s13584-017-0145-4. eCollection 2017.
9
Efficiency and equity considerations in the preferences of health policy-makers in Israel.
Isr J Health Policy Res. 2017 Apr 1;6:18. doi: 10.1186/s13584-017-0142-7. eCollection 2017.

引用本文的文献

2
Health Outcome Prioritization in Alzheimer's Disease: Understanding the Ethical Landscape.
J Alzheimers Dis. 2020;77(1):339-353. doi: 10.3233/JAD-191300.
4
Weighting Health Outcomes by Socioeconomic Position Using Stated Preferences.
Pharmacoecon Open. 2018 Mar;2(1):43-51. doi: 10.1007/s41669-017-0036-1.
5
Fair reckoning: a qualitative investigation of responses to an economic health resource allocation survey.
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):174-85. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00751.x. Epub 2012 Mar 6.
6
Assessing the impact of deliberative processes on the views of participants: is it 'in one ear and out the other'?
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):278-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00749.x. Epub 2012 Feb 2.
7
Societal values in the allocation of healthcare resources: is it all about the health gain?
Patient. 2011;4(4):207-25. doi: 10.2165/11588880-000000000-00000.

本文引用的文献

1
An estimate of the total worldwide societal costs of dementia in 2005.
Alzheimers Dement. 2007 Apr;3(2):81-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jalz.2007.02.001.
2
An ethical analysis of international health priority-setting.
Health Care Anal. 2008 Jun;16(2):145-60. doi: 10.1007/s10728-007-0065-5. Epub 2007 Aug 15.
3
Alzheimer's disease: epidemiology, genetics, and beyond.
Neurosci Bull. 2008 Apr;24(2):105-9. doi: 10.1007/s12264-008-0105-7.
4
Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries.
Int J Equity Health. 2008 Jan 21;7:4. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-7-4.
5
Economic considerations in the management of Alzheimer's disease.
Clin Interv Aging. 2006;1(2):143-54. doi: 10.2147/ciia.2006.1.2.143.
8
Experts disagree over NICE's approach for assessing drugs.
Lancet. 2007 Aug 25;370(9588):643-4. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)61321-X.
9
Public views on priority setting for high cost medications in public hospitals in Australia.
Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):224-35. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00439.x.
10
Prevention of Alzheimer's disease and dementia. Major findings from the Kungsholmen Project.
Physiol Behav. 2007 Sep 10;92(1-2):98-104. doi: 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.05.059. Epub 2007 May 25.

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