Suppr超能文献

延长绝症患者生命的治疗方法是否属于特殊情况?探讨选择和社会观点。

Are life-extending treatments for terminal illnesses a special case? Exploring choices and societal viewpoints.

机构信息

Yunus Centre for Social Business and Health, Glasgow Caledonian University, United Kingdom.

Institute of Health Policy & Management and Erasmus School of Economics, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Soc Sci Med. 2018 Feb;198:61-69. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.12.019. Epub 2017 Dec 16.

Abstract

Criteria used by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to assess life-extending, end-of-life (EoL) treatments imply that health gains from such treatments are valued more than other health gains. Despite claims that the policy is supported by societal values, evidence from preference elicitation studies is mixed and in-depth research has shown there are different societal viewpoints. Few studies elicit preferences for policies directly or combine different approaches to understand preferences. Survey questions were designed to investigate support for NICE EoL guidance at national and regional levels. These 'Decision Rule' and 'Treatment Choice' questions were administered to an online sample of 1496 UK respondents in May 2014. The same respondents answered questions designed to elicit their agreement with three viewpoints (previously identified and described) in relation to provision of EoL treatments for terminally ill patients. We report the findings of these choice questions and examine how they relate to each other and respondents' viewpoints. The Decision Rule questions described three policies: DA - a standard 'value for money' test, applied to all health technologies; DB - giving special consideration to all treatments for terminal illnesses; and DC - giving special consideration to specific categories of treatments for terminal illnesses e.g. life extension (as in NICE EoL guidance) or those that improve quality-of-life (QoL). Three Treatment Choices were presented: TA - improving QoL for patients with a non-terminal illness; TB - extending life for EoL patients; and TC - improving QoL at the EoL. DC received most support (45%) with most respondents giving special consideration to EoL only when treatments improved QoL. The most commonly preferred treatment choices were TA (51%) and TC (43%). Overall, this study challenges claims about public support for NICE's EoL guidance and the focus on life extension at EoL and substantiates existing evidence of plurality in societal values.

摘要

英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)用于评估延长生命、临终(EoL)治疗的标准意味着此类治疗带来的健康收益比其他健康收益更受重视。尽管有人声称该政策符合社会价值观,但偏好 elicitation 研究的证据存在分歧,深入研究表明存在不同的社会观点。很少有研究直接征求对政策的偏好,或者结合不同的方法来理解偏好。调查问题旨在调查国家和地区层面上对 NICE EoL 指南的支持。这些“决策规则”和“治疗选择”问题于 2014 年 5 月在英国的一个在线样本中对 1496 名受访者进行了调查。同一批受访者回答了旨在了解他们对三种观点(先前确定和描述)的认同程度的问题,这些观点与为绝症患者提供临终治疗有关。我们报告了这些选择问题的结果,并研究了它们之间的关系以及受访者的观点。决策规则问题描述了三种政策:DA-适用于所有卫生技术的标准“物有所值”测试;DB-特别考虑所有治疗绝症的方法;以及 DC-特别考虑绝症的特定类别的治疗方法,例如延长生命(如 NICE EoL 指南)或改善生活质量(QoL)的方法。提出了三种治疗选择:TA-改善非绝症患者的生活质量;TB-延长 EoL 患者的生命;TC-改善 EoL 时的生活质量。DC 获得了最多的支持(45%),大多数受访者只有在治疗方法改善 QoL 时才对 EoL 给予特殊考虑。最受欢迎的治疗选择是 TA(51%)和 TC(43%)。总的来说,这项研究对关于公众对 NICE 临终指南的支持以及对 EoL 时生命延长的关注的说法提出了挑战,并证实了社会价值观多样性的现有证据。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

8
Valuing QALYs at the end of life.生命终末期的 QALY 价值评估。
Soc Sci Med. 2014 Jul;113:5-14. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.04.039. Epub 2014 May 2.

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