Suppr超能文献

揭示医疗保健价值的要素,并利用来自英国两项离散选择实验的证据评估其重要性。

Unravelling Elements of Value of Healthcare and Assessing their Importance Using Evidence from Two Discrete-Choice Experiments in England.

机构信息

Social Protection and Health Division, Inter-American Development Bank, Washington, DC, USA.

Nuffield Department of Population Health, Health Economics Research Centre (HERC), University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 2024 Oct;42(10):1145-1159. doi: 10.1007/s40273-024-01416-5. Epub 2024 Jul 31.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Health systems are moving towards value-based care, implementing new care models that allegedly aim beyond patient outcomes. Therefore, a policy and academic debate is underway regarding the definition of value in healthcare, the inclusion of costs in value metrics, and the importance of each value element. This study aimed to define healthcare value elements and assess their relative importance (RI) to the public in England.

METHOD

Using data from 26 semi-structured interviews and a literature review, and applying decision-theory axioms, we selected a comprehensive and applicable set of value-based elements. Their RI was determined using two discrete choice experiments (DCEs) based on Bayesian D-efficient DCE designs, with one DCE incorporating healthcare costs expressed as income tax rise. Respondent preferences were analysed using mixed logit models.

RESULTS

Six value elements were identified: additional life-years, health-related quality of life, patient experience, target population size, equity, and cost. The DCE surveys were completed by 402 participants. All utility coefficients had the expected signs and were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Additional life-years (25.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 22.5-28.6%) and patient experience (25.2%; 95% CI 21.6-28.9%) received the highest RI, followed by target population size (22.4%; 95% CI 19.1-25.6%) and quality of life (17.6%; 95% CI 15.0-20.3%). Equity had the lowest RI (9.6%; 95% CI 6.4-12.1%), decreasing by 8.8 percentage points with cost inclusion. A similar reduction was observed in the RI of quality of life when cost was included.

CONCLUSION

The public prioritizes value elements not captured by conventional metrics, such as quality-adjusted life-years. Although cost inclusion did not alter the preference ranking, its inclusion in the value metric warrants careful consideration.

摘要

背景

医疗体系正在向基于价值的医疗保健模式转变,采用新的护理模式,据称这些模式的目标不仅仅是患者的治疗效果。因此,在医疗保健领域,关于价值的定义、价值衡量标准中成本的纳入以及每个价值要素的重要性等问题,引发了政策和学术讨论。本研究旨在确定医疗保健价值要素,并评估其对英格兰公众的相对重要性(RI)。

方法

利用 26 次半结构访谈和文献回顾的数据,以及应用决策理论公理,我们选择了一套全面适用的基于价值的要素。使用基于贝叶斯 D 有效 DCE 设计的两个离散选择实验(DCE)来确定它们的 RI,其中一个 DCE 将医疗保健成本表示为所得税增加。使用混合对数模型分析受访者的偏好。

结果

确定了 6 个价值要素:额外的寿命、健康相关生活质量、患者体验、目标人群规模、公平性和成本。有 402 名参与者完成了 DCE 调查。所有效用系数均具有预期的符号且具有统计学意义(p<0.05)。额外的寿命(25.3%;95%置信区间[CI]22.5-28.6%)和患者体验(25.2%;95% CI 21.6-28.9%)获得了最高的 RI,其次是目标人群规模(22.4%;95% CI 19.1-25.6%)和生活质量(17.6%;95% CI 15.0-20.3%)。公平性的 RI 最低(9.6%;95% CI 6.4-12.1%),纳入成本后降低了 8.8 个百分点。当纳入成本时,生活质量的 RI 也观察到类似的降低。

结论

公众更看重传统指标无法捕捉的价值要素,例如质量调整生命年。尽管成本纳入并未改变偏好排序,但在价值衡量标准中纳入成本仍需要谨慎考虑。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验