Banta H D, Vondeling H
CMT/TNO, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Soc Sci Med. 1994 Jun;38(12):1663-74. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(94)90068-x.
Evaluating new health care technology that is rapidly diffusing is one of the greatest challenges to researchers and policy-makers. If no evaluation is done until the technology is mature, evaluation will not influence processes of diffusion. If evaluation is done early, it may be irrelevant when it is completed, because of developments in the technology and changing indications for its use. Nonetheless, early evaluation seems to be the only strategy possible to improve the integration of evaluation and diffusion. These difficulties are illustrated by the case of lasers. Lasers are diffusing relatively rapidly into health care, and yet few laser applications have been well-evaluated. Looking back over the past 20 years or so, only one public body, the National Eye Institute of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) seems to have tried to address the problem of laser evaluation. In the case of the Eye Institute, it has consistently identified new technologies for treatment of eye conditions and has mounted well-designed prospective evaluations aimed at influencing clinical practice. However, these evaluations have not been integrated with public policy-making, and therefore their influence has been relatively slow to develop. In recent years, concerns about technology have brought more active attempts to develop public policies to affect diffusion. Excimer laser treatment of coronary artery disease, especially as dealt with in the Netherlands, illustrates how a strategy can be developed. Regulation has allowed diffusion to be constrained while evaluation is carried out. Results of the evaluation will guide subsequent diffusion. In the future, such results will probably be used in determining if the laser treatment should be included in the benefit package of health insurance. A strategy for improving diffusion processes requires continuous monitoring of technological developments in health care to identify candidates for such early assessment. Since assessment resources are limited, setting priorities between candidates for assessment is necessary. Once priorities have been determined, an evaluative strategy can be formulated. As in the case of laser treatment of coronary disease, a mechanism for constraining diffusion until evaluations are completed is necessary. Once the studies are completed, policy-making must be done promptly. The problem of successful implementation of this strategy lies with the public bodies, which are often not prepared to develop an integrated strategy of diffusion based on technology assessment and economic appraisal. Developing such a strategy, which would involve slowing diffusion in some cases and speeding it up in others, seems to have clear benefits.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
评估迅速普及的新型医疗技术是研究人员和政策制定者面临的最大挑战之一。如果在技术成熟之前不进行评估,评估将不会影响其普及过程。如果过早进行评估,由于技术的发展和使用适应症的变化,评估完成时可能就变得无关紧要了。尽管如此,早期评估似乎是改善评估与普及整合的唯一可行策略。激光的案例说明了这些困难。激光正在相对迅速地融入医疗保健领域,但很少有激光应用得到充分评估。回顾过去20年左右的时间,似乎只有一个公共机构,即美国国立卫生研究院(NIH)的国立眼科研究所,试图解决激光评估问题。就眼科研究所而言,它一直致力于确定治疗眼部疾病的新技术,并开展精心设计的前瞻性评估,旨在影响临床实践。然而,这些评估并未与公共政策制定相结合,因此其影响的发展相对缓慢。近年来,对技术的担忧促使人们更积极地尝试制定影响技术普及的公共政策。准分子激光治疗冠状动脉疾病,尤其是在荷兰的情况,说明了如何制定这样一种策略。监管使得在进行评估的同时能够限制技术的普及。评估结果将指导后续的普及工作。未来,这些结果可能会用于确定激光治疗是否应纳入医疗保险福利套餐。改善普及过程的策略需要持续监测医疗保健领域的技术发展,以确定适合进行此类早期评估的对象。由于评估资源有限,有必要在评估对象之间确定优先次序。一旦确定了优先次序,就可以制定评估策略。如同冠状动脉疾病的激光治疗案例一样,需要一种机制在评估完成之前限制技术的普及。一旦研究完成,必须迅速进行政策制定。成功实施这一策略的问题在于公共机构,它们往往不准备基于技术评估和经济评估制定综合的普及策略。制定这样一种策略,在某些情况下可能涉及减缓普及速度,而在其他情况下加快普及速度,似乎具有明显的益处。(摘要截取自400字)