University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Soc Sci Med. 2011 May;72(10):1711-6. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.03.032. Epub 2011 Apr 13.
Economic evaluations are increasingly common as evidence in priority setting decisions, but lack of quantification of equity impact represents a situation of asymmetric information that easily lead to discrepancies between stated preferences for distribution of health care and the preferences revealed in actual priority setting. We suggest Gini impact and Achievement Index methodology as tools that can be used to incorporate concerns for equal lifetime health in numerical evaluation of public health programs. In a case study from Tanzania we explore how these techniques may diminish this information asymmetry. By comparing a childhood vaccine with treatment of hypertension in adults, we show that concerns for equity in the distribution of healthy years can be captured with standard measures of inequality and combined with a maximization concern. This illustrative case from a low-income setting, where resources are insufficient to meet the needs of both patient groups, illustrates how quantification of equity impact may change priorities.
经济评估作为优先决策的证据越来越普遍,但缺乏对公平影响的量化表示存在信息不对称的情况,这很容易导致在医疗保健分配的表述偏好和实际优先设置中揭示的偏好之间出现差异。我们建议基尼影响和成就指数方法作为工具,可以用于将对平等终生健康的关注纳入公共卫生计划的数值评估中。在坦桑尼亚的一个案例研究中,我们探讨了这些技术如何减少这种信息不对称。通过比较儿童疫苗和成人高血压治疗,我们表明,对健康年限分配公平的关注可以用不平等的标准衡量来捕捉,并结合最大化的关注。这个来自低收入环境的说明性案例中,资源不足以满足两个患者群体的需求,说明了对公平影响的量化如何改变优先事项。