Arts and Science Program, McMaster University, Commons Building Room 105, 1280 Main Street West, Hamilton, Ontario, L8S 4K1, Canada.
Department of Family Medicine, McMaster University, David Braley Health Sciences Centre, 100 Main Street West, 5th Floor, Hamilton, Ontario, L8P 1H6, Canada; Centre for Health Economics and Policy Analysis, McMaster University, Canada; McMaster program for Education Research, Innovation & Theory, McMaster University, Canada.
Soc Sci Med. 2017 Dec;195:97-104. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.11.024. Epub 2017 Nov 16.
When evaluating new morally complex health technologies, policy decision-makers consider a broad range of different evaluations, which may include the technology's clinical effectiveness, cost effectiveness, and social or ethical implications. This type of holistic assessment is challenging, because each of these evaluations may be grounded in different and potentially contradictory assumptions about the technology's value. One such technology where evaluations conflict is Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT). Cost-effectiveness evaluations of NIPT often assess NIPT's ability to deliver on goals (i.e preventing the birth of children with disabilities) that social and ethical analyses suggest it should not have. Thus, cost effectiveness analyses frequently contradict social and ethical assessments of NIPT's value. We use the case of NIPT to explore how economic evaluations using a capabilities approach may be able to capture a broader, more ethical view of the value of NIPT. The capabilities approach is an evaluative framework which bases wellbeing assessments on a person's abilities, rather than their expressed preferences. It is linked to extra-welfarist approaches in health economic assessment. Beginning with Nussbaum's capability framework, we conducted a directed qualitative content analysis of interview data collected in 2014 from 27 Canadian women with personal experience of NIPT. We found that eight of Nussbaum's ten capabilities related to options, states, or choices that women valued in the context of NIPT, and identified one new capability. Our findings suggest that women value NIPT for its ability to provide more and different choices in the prenatal care pathway, and that a capabilities approach can indeed capture the value of NIPT in a way that goes beyond measuring health outcomes of ambiguous social and ethical value. More broadly, the capabilities approach may serve to resolve contradictions between ethical and economic evaluations of health technologies, and contribute to extra-welfarist approaches in the assessment of morally complex health technologies.
当评估新的具有复杂道德问题的卫生技术时,政策决策者会考虑广泛的不同评估,其中可能包括技术的临床效果、成本效益以及社会或伦理影响。这种整体评估具有挑战性,因为这些评估中的每一种都可能基于对技术价值的不同且潜在矛盾的假设。非侵入性产前检测(NIPT)就是这样一种技术,其评估结果相互冲突。NIPT 的成本效益评估通常评估 NIPT 实现目标的能力(即避免残疾儿童出生),而社会和伦理分析表明它不应该有这种能力。因此,成本效益分析经常与 NIPT 价值的社会和伦理评估相矛盾。我们使用 NIPT 案例来探讨使用能力方法进行经济评估如何能够更全面、更具道德地捕捉 NIPT 的价值。能力方法是一种评估框架,它基于一个人的能力而不是他们的表达偏好来评估福利。它与健康经济评估中的额外福利主义方法有关。从 Nussbaum 的能力框架开始,我们对 2014 年从 27 名具有 NIPT 个人经验的加拿大女性那里收集的访谈数据进行了定向定性内容分析。我们发现,Nussbaum 的十个能力中有八个与女性在 NIPT 背景下重视的选项、状态或选择有关,并确定了一个新的能力。我们的研究结果表明,女性重视 NIPT,因为它能够在产前护理途径中提供更多和不同的选择,而能力方法确实可以以超越衡量具有模糊社会和伦理价值的健康结果的方式来捕捉 NIPT 的价值。更广泛地说,能力方法可以解决卫生技术的伦理和经济评估之间的矛盾,并为评估具有复杂道德问题的卫生技术的额外福利主义方法做出贡献。