Using needs-based frameworks for evaluating new technologies: An application to genetic tests

被引:4
作者
Rogowski, Wolf H. [1 ,2 ]
Schleidgen, Sebastian [3 ]
机构
[1] German Res Ctr Environm Hlth GmbH, Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen, D-85764 Neuherberg, Germany
[2] Univ Munich, Ctr Clin, Inst & Outpatient Clin Occupat Social & Environm, D-80336 Munich, Germany
[3] Univ Munich, Inst Eth Hist & Theory Med, D-80336 Munich, Germany
基金
欧盟第七框架计划;
关键词
Genetics; Health care prioritization; Needs-based evaluation frameworks; HEALTH-CARE; COST-EFFECTIVENESS; SERVICES; RECOMMENDATIONS; ALLOCATION; EQUITY; HEMOCHROMATOSIS; PRIORITIZATION; PRINCIPLES; DISORDERS;
D O I
10.1016/j.healthpol.2014.11.006
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Given the multitude of newly available genetic tests in the face of limited healthcare budgets, the European Society of Human Genetics assessed how genetic services can be prioritized fairly. Using (health) benefit maximizing frameworks for this purpose has been criticized on the grounds that rather than maximization, fairness requires meeting claims (e.g. based on medical need) equitably. This study develops a prioritization score for genetic tests to facilitate equitable allocation based on need-based claims. It includes attributes representing health need associated with hereditary conditions (severity and progression), a genetic service's suitability to alleviate need (evidence of benefit and likelihood of positive result) and costs to meet the needs. A case study for measuring the attributes is provided and a suggestion is made how need-based claims can be quantified in a priority function. Attribute weights can be informed by data from discrete-choice experiments. Further work is needed to measure the attributes across the multitude of genetic tests and to determine appropriate weights. The priority score is most likely to be considered acceptable if developed within a decision process which meets criteria of procedural fairness and if the priority score is interpreted as "strength of recommendation" rather than a fixed cut-off value. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:147 / 155
页数:9
相关论文
共 52 条
[11]  
Bowling A., 1997, MEASURING HLTH REV Q, V2nd
[12]   Valuing health states for use in cost-effectiveness analysis [J].
Brazier, John .
PHARMACOECONOMICS, 2008, 26 (09) :769-779
[13]   Welfarism vs. extra-welfarism [J].
Brouwer, Werner B. F. ;
Culyer, Anthony J. ;
van Exel, N. Job A. ;
Rutten, Frans F. H. .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2008, 27 (02) :325-338
[14]   Economic analyses of human genetics services: A systematic review [J].
Carlson, JJ ;
Henrikson, NB ;
Veenstra, DL ;
Ramsey, SD .
GENETICS IN MEDICINE, 2005, 7 (08) :519-523
[15]   EuroGentest - a European Network of Excellence aimed at harmonizing genetic testing services [J].
Cassiman, JJ .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF HUMAN GENETICS, 2005, 13 (10) :1103-1105
[16]   QALYs, and the capability approach [J].
Cookson, R .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2005, 14 (08) :817-829
[17]   Equity considerations in health care:: The relevance of claims [J].
Cuadras-Morató, X ;
Pinto-Prades, JL ;
Abellán-Perpiñán, JM .
HEALTH ECONOMICS, 2001, 10 (03) :187-205
[18]   The ethics of accountability in managed care reform [J].
Daniels, N ;
Sabin, J .
HEALTH AFFAIRS, 1998, 17 (05) :50-64
[19]  
Daniels Norman., 2008, JUST HLTH M HLTH NEE
[20]   The moral aspects of prenatal diagnosis [J].
Eisenberg, VH ;
Schenker, JJ .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 1997, 72 (01) :35-45