• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

德国医疗质量与效率研究所

Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: Germany.

作者信息

Nasser Mona, Sawicki Peter

机构信息

Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care.

出版信息

Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;57:1-12.

PMID:19639711
Abstract

The Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) was established in 2004 to provide Germany's Federal Joint Committee with evidence-based evaluations of the benefits and cost benefits of health services, and functions in an advisory role. IQWiG reviews available evidence and produces recommendations after an extensive process of consultation with experts and stakeholders. IQWiG's recommendations are then considered by the Joint Committee in issuing coverage and payment directives. Under German law, insurance funds must cover any service that is medically necessary, which means that cost-effectiveness analysis can only be used to exclude a treatment from coverage if at least one equivalent alternative exists.

摘要

医疗质量与效率研究所(IQWiG)成立于2004年,旨在为德国联邦联合委员会提供关于医疗服务益处和成本效益的循证评估,并发挥咨询作用。IQWiG会审查现有证据,并在与专家和利益相关者进行广泛磋商后提出建议。联合委员会在发布覆盖范围和支付指令时会考虑IQWiG的建议。根据德国法律,保险基金必须涵盖任何具有医学必要性的服务,这意味着只有在至少存在一种等效替代方案的情况下,成本效益分析才能用于将某种治疗排除在覆盖范围之外。

相似文献

1
Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care: Germany.德国医疗质量与效率研究所
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;57:1-12.
2
National Authority for Health: France.法国国家卫生管理局
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;58:1-9.
3
Germany's decision rule for setting ceiling prices of drugs: a comparative analysis with other decision rules.德国药品定价上限设定决策规则:与其他决策规则的比较分析。
Appl Health Econ Health Policy. 2011 Mar 1;9(2):65-71. doi: 10.2165/11586640-000000000-00000.
4
Evidence-based decision-making within Australia's pharmaceutical benefits scheme.澳大利亚药品福利计划中的循证决策。
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;60:1-13.
5
Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany.德国药品效益评估的程序和方法。
Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5.
6
Comparative effectiveness review within the U.K.'s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence.英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所开展的比较效果评估
Issue Brief (Commonw Fund). 2009 Jul;59:1-12.
7
[Comments by the Working Group for Methods of Economic Evaluation in Health Care (AG MEG) to IQWiG's Draft Guidelines "Methods for Assessment of the Relation of Benefits to Costs in the German Statutory Health Care System"].[医疗保健经济评估方法工作组(AG MEG)对IQWiG《德国法定医疗保健系统中效益与成本关系评估方法》指南草案的评论]
Gesundheitswesen. 2008 Jun;70(6):e1-16. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1077059.
8
[Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany].[德国药品效益评估的程序和方法]
Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008 Dec;133 Suppl 7:S225-46. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1100954. Epub 2008 Nov 25.
9
[Experiences with and impact of health technology assessment on the German Standing Committee of physicians and patients].[卫生技术评估对德国医师与患者常设委员会的影响及相关经验]
Z Arztl Fortbild Qualitatssich. 2002 Feb;96(2):82-90.
10
How should cost-effectiveness analysis be used in health technology coverage decisions? Evidence from the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence approach.成本效益分析应如何用于卫生技术覆盖决策?来自英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所方法的证据。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2007 Apr;12(2):73-9. doi: 10.1258/135581907780279521.

引用本文的文献

1
Implicit factors influencing the HTA deliberative processes in 5 European countries: results from a mixed-methods research.影响5个欧洲国家卫生技术评估审议过程的隐性因素:一项混合方法研究的结果
Health Policy Open. 2023 Nov 20;5:100109. doi: 10.1016/j.hpopen.2023.100109. eCollection 2023 Dec 15.
2
Demographics and access to head and neck cancer care in rural areas compared to urban areas in Germany.德国农村地区与城市地区的头颈部癌症治疗的人口统计学和可及性比较。
Cancer Med. 2023 Sep;12(18):18826-18836. doi: 10.1002/cam4.6505. Epub 2023 Sep 14.
3
The Organic Turn: Coping With Pandemic and Non-pandemic Challenges by Integrating Evidence-, Theory-, Experience-, and Context-Based Knowledge in Advising Health Policy.
有机转变:通过整合循证、理论、经验和基于情境的知识,应对大流行和非大流行挑战,为卫生政策提供咨询。
Front Public Health. 2021 Nov 24;9:727427. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.727427. eCollection 2021.
4
Massive uterine fibroid: a diagnostic dilemma: a case report and review of the literature.巨大子宫肌瘤:诊断难题——病例报告及文献复习。
J Med Case Rep. 2021 Jul 13;15(1):344. doi: 10.1186/s13256-021-02959-3.
5
Enhanced Recovery after Intensive Care (ERIC): study protocol for a German stepped wedge cluster randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a critical care telehealth program on process quality and functional outcomes.重症监护后强化康复(ERIC):一项德国阶梯楔形整群随机对照试验的研究方案,以评估重症监护远程医疗计划对过程质量和功能结局的有效性。
BMJ Open. 2020 Sep 25;10(9):e036096. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-036096.
6
A systematic review of cost-sharing strategies used within publicly-funded drug plans in member countries of the organisation for economic co-operation and development.对经济合作与发展组织成员国公共资助药品计划中使用的费用分担策略的系统评价。
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 11;9(3):e90434. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0090434. eCollection 2014.
7
Role of centralized review processes for making reimbursement decisions on new health technologies in Europe.集中审查程序在欧洲新医疗技术报销决策中的作用。
Clinicoecon Outcomes Res. 2011;3:117-86. doi: 10.2147/CEOR.S14407. Epub 2011 Aug 30.
8
Health technology funding decision-making processes around the world: the same, yet different.全球卫生技术资金决策过程:大同小异。
Pharmacoeconomics. 2011 Jun;29(6):475-95. doi: 10.2165/11586420-000000000-00000.