Lysdahl Kristin Bakke, Oortwijn Wija, van der Wilt Gert Jan, Refolo Pietro, Sacchini Dario, Mozygemba Kati, Gerhardus Ansgar, Brereton Louise, Hofmann Bjørn
Centre for Medical Ethics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway.
ECORYS Netherlands BV, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
BMC Med Ethics. 2016 Mar 22;17:16. doi: 10.1186/s12910-016-0099-z.
In the field of health technology assessment (HTA), there are several approaches that can be used for ethical analysis. However, there is a scarcity of literature that critically evaluates and compares the strength and weaknesses of these approaches when they are applied in practice. In this paper, we analyse the applicability of some selected approaches for addressing ethical issues in HTA in the field of complex health interventions. Complex health interventions have been the focus of methodological attention in HTA. However, the potential methodological challenges for ethical analysis are as yet unknown.
Six of the most frequently described and applied ethical approaches in HTA were critically assessed against a set of five characteristics of complex health interventions: multiple and changing perspectives, indeterminate phenomena, uncertain causality, unpredictable outcomes, and ethical complexity. The assessments are based on literature and the authors' experiences of developing, applying and assessing the approaches.
The Interactive, participatory HTA approach is by its nature and flexibility, applicable across most complexity characteristics. Wide Reflective Equilibrium is also flexible and its openness to different perspectives makes it better suited for complex health interventions than more rigid conventional approaches, such as Principlism and Casuistry. Approaches developed for HTA purposes are fairly applicable for complex health interventions, which one could expect because they include various ethical perspectives, such as the HTA Core Model® and the Socratic approach.
This study shows how the applicability for addressing ethical issues in HTA of complex health interventions differs between the selected ethical approaches. Knowledge about these differences may be helpful when choosing and applying an approach for ethical analyses in HTA. We believe that the study contributes to increasing awareness and interest of the ethical aspects of complex health interventions in general.
在卫生技术评估(HTA)领域,有几种方法可用于伦理分析。然而,在实际应用中,对这些方法的优缺点进行批判性评估和比较的文献却很匮乏。在本文中,我们分析了一些选定方法在复杂卫生干预领域的HTA中解决伦理问题的适用性。复杂卫生干预一直是HTA方法学关注的焦点。然而,伦理分析潜在的方法学挑战尚不明确。
针对复杂卫生干预的五个特征,即多个且不断变化的视角、不确定的现象、不确定的因果关系、不可预测的结果以及伦理复杂性,对HTA中六种最常被描述和应用的伦理方法进行了批判性评估。评估基于文献以及作者在开发、应用和评估这些方法方面的经验。
互动式、参与性HTA方法因其性质和灵活性,适用于大多数复杂性特征。宽泛的反思平衡也具有灵活性,其对不同视角的开放性使其比更僵化的传统方法(如原则主义和决疑法)更适合复杂卫生干预。为HTA目的而开发的方法相当适用于复杂卫生干预,这是可以预期的,因为它们包含了各种伦理视角,如HTA核心模型®和苏格拉底方法。
本研究表明,在选定的伦理方法中,解决复杂卫生干预的HTA伦理问题的适用性存在差异。了解这些差异可能有助于在HTA中选择和应用伦理分析方法。我们认为,该研究总体上有助于提高对复杂卫生干预伦理方面的认识和兴趣。