Suppr超能文献

重视药品和其他卫生技术的社会影响:当前最佳实践用户指南。

Valuing the Societal Impact of Medicines and Other Health Technologies: A User Guide to Current Best Practices.

机构信息

Mann School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Center for Healthcare Economics and Policy, FTI Consulting, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

出版信息

Forum Health Econ Policy. 2024 Nov 8;27(1):29-116. doi: 10.1515/fhep-2024-0014. eCollection 2024 Jun 1.

Abstract

This study argues that value assessment conducted from a societal perspective should rely on the Generalized Cost-Effectiveness Analysis (GCEA) framework proposed herein. Recently developed value assessment inventories - such as the Second Panel on Cost-Effectiveness's "impact inventory" and International Society of Pharmacoeconomics Outcomes Research (ISPOR) "value flower" - aimed to more comprehensively capture the benefits and costs of new health technologies from a societal perspective. Nevertheless, application of broader value elements in practice has been limited in part because quantifying these elements can be complex, but also because there have been numerous methodological advances since these value inventories have been released (e.g. generalized and risk-adjusted cost effectiveness). To facilitate estimation of treatment value from a societal perspective, this paper provides an updated value inventory - called the GCEA value flower - and a for implementing GCEA for health economics researchers and practitioners. GCEA considers 15 broader value elements across four categories: (i) uncertainty, (ii) dynamics, (iii) beneficiary, and (iv) additional value components. The uncertainty category incorporates patient risk preferences into value assessment. The dynamics category petals account for the evolution of real-world treatment value (e.g. option value) and includes drug pricing trends (e.g. future genericization). The beneficiary category accounts for the fact health technologies can benefit others (e.g. caregivers) and also that society may care to whom health benefits accrue (e.g. equity). Finally, GCEA incorporates additional broader sources of value (e.g. community spillovers, productivity losses). This GCEA user guide aims to facilitate both the estimation of each of these value elements and the incorporation of these values into health technology assessment when conducted from a societal perspective.

摘要

本研究认为,从社会角度进行的价值评估应依赖于本文提出的广义成本效益分析(GCEA)框架。最近开发的价值评估清单,如第二成本效益小组的“影响清单”和国际药物经济学结果研究学会(ISPOR)的“价值花”,旨在更全面地从社会角度捕捉新医疗技术的效益和成本。然而,在实践中应用更广泛的价值要素受到了限制,部分原因是量化这些要素可能很复杂,但也因为自这些价值清单发布以来,出现了许多方法学上的进步(例如广义和风险调整的成本效益)。为了便于从社会角度估计治疗价值,本文提供了一个更新的价值清单,称为 GCEA 价值花,并提供了一个用于实施 GCEA 的框架,供卫生经济学研究人员和从业者使用。GCEA 考虑了四个类别中的 15 个更广泛的价值要素:(i)不确定性,(ii)动态,(iii)受益人和(iv)附加价值要素。不确定性类别将患者风险偏好纳入价值评估。动态类别花瓣考虑了实际治疗价值的演变(例如选择价值),并包括药物定价趋势(例如未来的通用化)。受益人类别考虑到健康技术可以使他人受益(例如照顾者),以及社会可能关心健康收益归属的事实(例如公平)。最后,GCEA 纳入了其他更广泛的价值来源(例如社区溢出效应、生产力损失)。本 GCEA 用户指南旨在促进对这些价值要素的每个要素的估计,并在从社会角度进行健康技术评估时将这些价值纳入其中。

相似文献

8

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
It Is Time to Reconsider the 3% Discount Rate.是时候重新考虑 3%的贴现率了。
Value Health. 2024 May;27(5):578-584. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2024.03.001. Epub 2024 Mar 9.
5
Inhaled epinephrine for anaphylaxis: Time for another look?吸入肾上腺素治疗过敏反应:是否该重新审视了?
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2024 Mar;132(3):267-269. doi: 10.1016/j.anai.2023.12.003. Epub 2023 Dec 9.
9
Why is the UK subscription model for antibiotics considered successful?为什么英国的抗生素订阅模式被认为是成功的?
Lancet Microbe. 2023 Nov;4(11):e852-e853. doi: 10.1016/S2666-5247(23)00250-1. Epub 2023 Aug 22.

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