• 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

评估英国医保决策人制定的白内障手术临床阈值政策。

Evaluation of clinical threshold policies for cataract surgery among English commissioners.

机构信息

Department of Primary Care and Public Health, Imperial College, London.

出版信息

J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012 Oct;17(4):241-7. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.012023. Epub 2012 Sep 11.

DOI:10.1258/jhsrp.2012.012023
PMID:22969092
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To ascertain if access to cataract surgery is being restricted in England and to describe any explicit threshold criteria.

METHODS

A survey of 151 local commissioners to explore their cataract surgery policy. A literature review identified research evidence about thresholds for cataract surgery. A checklist was devised and applied to the policies supplied by commissioners.

RESULTS

Almost half (71/151) of commissioners were restricting access to surgery and this included patients with some capacity to benefit. There was wide variation in the scope and content of the 67 policies which were available for review. Almost all (92%) commissioners use criteria that do not reflect guidance or research evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who could benefit from cataract surgery are being excluded by some commissioners. Variations in policy between commissioners results in inequalities in access.

摘要

目的

确定在英格兰是否限制了白内障手术的机会,并描述任何明确的阈值标准。

方法

对 151 名地方专员进行调查,以探讨他们的白内障手术政策。文献综述确定了有关白内障手术阈值的研究证据。设计了一份清单,并将其应用于专员提供的政策。

结果

几乎一半(71/151)的专员正在限制手术机会,这包括一些有能力受益的患者。可用审查的 67 项政策在范围和内容上存在很大差异。几乎所有(92%)的专员使用的标准都不反映指导或研究证据。

结论

一些专员将那些可以从白内障手术中受益的患者排除在外。专员之间政策的差异导致获得机会的不平等。

相似文献

1
Evaluation of clinical threshold policies for cataract surgery among English commissioners.评估英国医保决策人制定的白内障手术临床阈值政策。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012 Oct;17(4):241-7. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2012.012023. Epub 2012 Sep 11.
2
Commissioning processes in primary care trusts: a repeated cross-sectional survey of health care commissioners in England.初级保健信托机构的委托程序:对英格兰医疗保健委托方的重复横断面调查。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012 Jan;17 Suppl 1:31-9. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2011.010191.
3
The cataract surgery access debate: why variation may be a good thing.白内障手术入路的争论:为何差异可能是件好事。
Eye (Lond). 2016 Mar;30(3):331-2. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.272. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
4
Implementing world class commissioning competencies.实施世界级调试能力。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2012 Jan;17 Suppl 1:40-8. doi: 10.1258/jhsrp.2011.011104.
5
Commissioners struggle to cut back on services, survey finds.调查发现,专员们难以削减服务。
BMJ. 2011 Sep 19;343:d5961. doi: 10.1136/bmj.d5961.
6
Rural proofing for health: a commentary.乡村卫生保障:一篇评论
Rural Remote Health. 2005 Apr-Jun;5(2):411. Epub 2005 May 9.
7
The maintenance of confidentiality in primary care: a survey of policies and procedures.初级保健中的保密措施:政策与程序调查
AIDS Care. 2001 Apr;13(2):251-6. doi: 10.1080/09540120020018251.
8
The MODEL project: a scoring system to manage demand for cataract and joint replacement surgery.MODEL项目:一种管理白内障和关节置换手术需求的评分系统。
Br J Gen Pract. 2001 Nov;51(472):917-9.
9
An evaluation of personal medical services: the times they are a changin'.个人医疗服务评估:时代在变。
J Interprof Care. 2003 May;17(2):127-39. doi: 10.1080/1356182031000081731.
10
How to achieve universal coverage of cataract surgical services in developing countries: lessons from systematic reviews of other services.如何在发展中国家实现白内障手术服务的普遍覆盖:来自其他服务系统评价的经验教训。
Ophthalmic Epidemiol. 2012 Dec;19(6):329-39. doi: 10.3109/09286586.2012.717674. Epub 2012 Oct 22.

引用本文的文献

1
Variations in policies for accessing elective musculoskeletal procedures in the English National Health Service: A documentary analysis.英国国民保健制度中获取选择性肌肉骨骼手术政策的差异:文献分析。
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2022 Jul;27(3):190-202. doi: 10.1177/13558196221091518. Epub 2022 May 15.
2
How to defuse a demographic time bomb: the way forward?如何拆除人口定时炸弹:前进的道路?
Eye (Lond). 2017 Nov;31(11):1519-1522. doi: 10.1038/eye.2017.114. Epub 2017 Jun 16.
3
Should Countries Set an Explicit Health Benefits Package? The Case of the English National Health Service.
各国应该设定明确的医保福利套餐吗?以英国国民医疗服务体系为例。
Value Health. 2017 Jan;20(1):60-66. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.01.004.
4
The cataract surgery access debate: why variation may be a good thing.白内障手术入路的争论:为何差异可能是件好事。
Eye (Lond). 2016 Mar;30(3):331-2. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.272. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
5
The Royal College of Ophthalmologists' Cataract Surgery Commissioning Guidance: executive summary.皇家眼科医学院白内障手术委托指南:执行摘要
Eye (Lond). 2016 Mar;30(3):498-502. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.271. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
6
The Royal College of Ophthalmologists' National Ophthalmology Database study of cataract surgery: report 1, visual outcomes and complications.皇家眼科医学院白内障手术全国眼科数据库研究:报告1,视觉效果与并发症
Eye (Lond). 2015 Apr;29(4):552-60. doi: 10.1038/eye.2015.3. Epub 2015 Feb 13.
7
'Cosmetic boob jobs' or evidence-based breast surgery: an interpretive policy analysis of the rationing of 'low value' treatments in the English National Health Service.“隆胸整形手术”还是循证乳房手术:对英国国民医疗服务体系中“低价值”治疗配给的解释性政策分析
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 Sep 20;14:413. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-413.