Global Health Cluster, Division for Health Services, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2023;12:7541. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2022.7541. Epub 2023 Feb 13.
In their recent article on evidence-informed deliberative processes (EDPs) for health benefit package decisions, Oortwijn et al examine how the different steps of EDP play out in eight countries with relatively mature institutions for using health technology assessment (HTA). This commentary examines how EDP addresses stakeholder involvement in decision-making for equitable progress towards universal health coverage (UHC). It focuses on the value of inclusiveness, the need to pay attention to trade-offs between desirable features of EDP and the need to broaden the scope of processes examined beyond those specifically tied to producing and using HTAs . It concludes that EDPs have contributed to significant progress for health benefit design decisions worldwide and holds much potential in further application. At the same time, this commentary calls for prudence: investments in EDPs should be efficiently deployed to enhance the pre-existing legislative, institutional and political framework that exist to promote fair and legitimate healthcare decisions.
在最近一篇关于循证审议程序(EDP)在医保目录决策中应用的文章中,Oortwijn 等人研究了 EDP 的不同步骤在八个具有相对成熟的卫生技术评估(HTA)应用机构的国家中是如何实施的。本文评论探讨了 EDP 如何解决利益相关者在实现全民健康覆盖(UHC)公平进展方面的决策参与问题。它侧重于包容性的价值,需要注意 EDP 中可取特征之间的权衡,以及需要将所审查的过程范围扩大到不仅仅局限于专门用于制定和使用 HTA 的过程。它的结论是,EDP 为全球医保目录设计决策做出了重大贡献,并具有进一步应用的巨大潜力。同时,本文评论呼吁谨慎行事:应有效地投资于 EDP,以加强现有的立法、制度和政治框架,以促进公平和合法的医疗保健决策。