Young Terry, Morton Alec, Soorapanth Sada
Brunel University London, Uxbridge, UK.
University of Strathclyde Business School, Glasgow, UK.
Future Healthc J. 2018 Oct;5(3):156-159. doi: 10.7861/futurehosp.5-3-156.
NHS organisations are being challenged to transform -themselves sustainably in the face of increasing demands, but they have little room for error. To manage trade-offs and risks precisely, they must integrate two very different streams of -expertise: systems approaches to service design and implementation, and economic evaluation of the type pioneered by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) for pharmaceuticals and interventions. Neither approach is fully embedded in NHS service transformation, while the combination as an integrated discipline is still some way away. We share three examples to show how design methods may be deployed within a value-for-money framework to plan operationally and in terms of clinical outcomes. They are real cases briefly described and the unreferenced ones are anonymised. They have been selected by one of the authors (TY) during his sabbatical research because each illustrates a commonly observed challenge. To meet these challenges, we argue that the health economics cost / quality-adjusted life year (QALY) framework promulgated by NICE provides an under-appreciated lens for thinking about trade-offs and we highlight some systems tools which have also been under-utilised in this context.
面对日益增长的需求,英国国民医疗服务体系(NHS)的各组织面临着实现可持续转型的挑战,但它们容错空间很小。为了精确管理权衡取舍和风险,它们必须整合两种截然不同的专业知识流:服务设计与实施的系统方法,以及由英国国家卫生与临床优化研究所(NICE)开创的针对药品和干预措施的那种经济评估。这两种方法在NHS服务转型中都未得到充分应用,而将它们结合成一门综合学科仍有很长的路要走。我们分享三个例子,展示如何在性价比框架内运用设计方法来进行运营规划和临床结果规划。这些都是真实案例,简要描述,未注明出处的案例已进行匿名处理。它们是由其中一位作者(TY)在其休假研究期间挑选出来的,因为每个案例都说明了一个常见的挑战。为应对这些挑战,我们认为NICE颁布的健康经济学成本/质量调整生命年(QALY)框架为思考权衡取舍提供了一个未得到充分重视的视角,并且我们强调了一些在这种情况下也未得到充分利用的系统工具。