Kaplan R M
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla 92093-0622.
Med Care. 1994 Oct;32(10):975-88. doi: 10.1097/00005650-199410000-00001.
Oregon proposed a unique social experiment in which combinations of medical conditions and treatments were prioritized. Under the proposed program, providers would not be reimbursed for services relevant to 17% of the condition-treatment pairs. The program was designed to expand access and allow significantly more residents to qualify for Medicaid. The original Oregon proposal used four levels of human judgment: community values assessed in town meetings; ratings of the desirability of health states; medical judgment of treatment efficacy; and subjective reordering of the list by Oregon Health Services Commissioners. In August 1992, the Department of Health and Human Services rejected Oregon's application to proceed with the experiment, objecting to the use of one of the four types of subjective data: ratings of the desirability of health states. A revised application that eliminated this one subjective component was approved in March 1993. This paper demonstrates that among the four levels of judgment, the ratings of health states were supported by the most evidence of reliability and validity. Implications for future prioritization experiments are discussed.
俄勒冈州提出了一项独特的社会实验,在该实验中,医疗状况和治疗方法的组合被赋予了优先级。根据提议的方案,对于17%的病症 - 治疗组合所涉及的服务,医疗机构将不会获得报销。该方案旨在扩大医保覆盖范围,使更多居民有资格获得医疗补助。俄勒冈州最初的提议采用了四个层次的人为判断:在城镇会议上评估的社区价值观;对健康状态合意性的评级;对治疗效果的医学判断;以及俄勒冈州卫生服务专员对清单的主观重新排序。1992年8月,卫生与公众服务部驳回了俄勒冈州进行该实验的申请,反对使用四种主观数据中的一种:对健康状态合意性的评级。1993年3月,一份消除了这一主观成分的修订申请获得批准。本文表明,在这四个判断层次中,对健康状态的评级得到了关于可靠性和有效性的最多证据的支持。文中还讨论了对未来优先级实验的启示。