Imperial College Business School & Centre for Health Policy, London, UK.
Health Econ. 2013 Feb;22(2):119-31. doi: 10.1002/hec.2793. Epub 2012 Jan 11.
It has long been standard practice to ask patients in clinical trials about their health status, but the practice is now being extended to patients receiving treatment on a routine basis. In this paper, we examine four types of analyses that these health data might inform: comparisons of alternative treatments for the same condition, of health care providers, of changes in performance over time and of treatments of different types of condition. Analytical challenges arise because counterfactuals cannot be observed and because health status cannot be measured continuously. The implications of these challenges and the ability to meet them vary according to the comparative exercise. We argue that, provided with a sufficient number of health status measures for each patient and proper risk adjustment, health status measurement has great potential to inform the first three types of comparison. However, we believe that it is not yet possible to use such data to make secure comparative judgements about the outcomes from treatment for different types of condition.
长期以来,在临床试验中询问患者的健康状况一直是标准做法,但现在这一做法正在扩展到接受常规治疗的患者。在本文中,我们研究了这些健康数据可能提供的四种分析:同一种疾病的不同治疗方法的比较、医疗保健提供者的比较、随着时间的推移而发生的绩效变化的比较以及不同类型疾病的治疗方法的比较。由于无法观察到反事实情况,并且健康状况无法连续测量,因此出现了分析挑战。这些挑战的影响以及应对它们的能力因比较练习而异。我们认为,只要为每个患者提供足够数量的健康状况衡量标准并进行适当的风险调整,健康状况衡量就有可能为前三种比较提供信息。但是,我们认为,目前还不可能使用此类数据对不同类型疾病的治疗结果做出有把握的比较判断。