Morton Alec, Adler Amanda I, Bell David, Briggs Andrew, Brouwer Werner, Claxton Karl, Craig Neil, Fischer Alastair, McGregor Peter, van Baal Pieter
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.
Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge, UK.
Health Econ. 2016 Aug;25(8):933-8. doi: 10.1002/hec.3366.
In this editorial, we consider the vexing issue of 'unrelated future costs' (for example, the costs of caring for people with dementia or kidney failure after preventing their deaths from a heart attack). The National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance is not to take such costs into account in technology appraisals. However, standard appraisal practice involves modelling the benefits of those unrelated technologies. We argue that there is a sound principled reason for including both the costs and benefits of unrelated care. Changing this practice would have material consequences for decisions about reimbursing particular technologies, and we urge future research to understand this better. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
在这篇社论中，我们探讨了“不相关未来成本”这一棘手问题（例如，在预防人们因心脏病发作死亡后，照顾痴呆症患者或肾衰竭患者的成本）。英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所（NICE）的指导意见是，在技术评估中不考虑此类成本。然而，标准的评估做法包括对那些不相关技术的益处进行建模。我们认为，纳入不相关护理的成本和益处有合理的原则性理由。改变这种做法将对特定技术报销决策产生重大影响，我们敦促未来的研究能更好地理解这一点。版权所有© 2016约翰·威利父子有限公司。
