在经济评估中纳入医疗保健的可及性和公平性:指南范围审查。

IF 2.6 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Bryony Dawkins, Bethany Shinkins, Tim Ensor, David Jayne, David Meads
{"title":"在经济评估中纳入医疗保健的可及性和公平性:指南范围审查。","authors":"Bryony Dawkins, Bethany Shinkins, Tim Ensor, David Jayne, David Meads","doi":"10.1017/S0266462324000618","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>International development agendas increasingly push for access to healthcare for all through universal healthcare coverage. Health economic evaluations and health technology assessment (HTA) could provide evidence to support this but do not routinely incorporate consideration of equitable access.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook an international scoping review of health economic evaluation and HTA guidelines to examine how well issues of healthcare access and equity are represented, evidence recommendations, and gaps in current guidance to support evidence generation in this area. Guidelines were sourced from guideline repositories and websites of international agencies and organizations providing best practice methods guidance. Articles providing methods guidance for the conduct of HTA, or health economic evaluation, were included, except where they were not available in English and a suitable translation could not be obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded forty-seven national, four international, and nine independent guidelines, along with eighty-six articles providing specific methods guidance. The inclusion of equity and access considerations in current guidance is extremely limited. Where they do feature, detail on specific methods for providing evidence on these issues is sparse.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Economic evaluation could be a valuable tool to provide evidence for the best healthcare strategies that not only maximize health but also ensure equitable access to care for all. Such evidence would be invaluable in supporting progress towards universal healthcare coverage. Clear guidance is required to ensure evaluations provide evidence on the best strategies to support equitable access to healthcare, but such guidance rarely exists in current best practice and guidance documents.</p>","PeriodicalId":14467,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","volume":"40 1","pages":"e59"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579673/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incorporating healthcare access and equity in economic evaluations: a scoping review of guidelines.\",\"authors\":\"Bryony Dawkins, Bethany Shinkins, Tim Ensor, David Jayne, David Meads\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0266462324000618\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>International development agendas increasingly push for access to healthcare for all through universal healthcare coverage. Health economic evaluations and health technology assessment (HTA) could provide evidence to support this but do not routinely incorporate consideration of equitable access.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We undertook an international scoping review of health economic evaluation and HTA guidelines to examine how well issues of healthcare access and equity are represented, evidence recommendations, and gaps in current guidance to support evidence generation in this area. Guidelines were sourced from guideline repositories and websites of international agencies and organizations providing best practice methods guidance. Articles providing methods guidance for the conduct of HTA, or health economic evaluation, were included, except where they were not available in English and a suitable translation could not be obtained.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The search yielded forty-seven national, four international, and nine independent guidelines, along with eighty-six articles providing specific methods guidance. The inclusion of equity and access considerations in current guidance is extremely limited. Where they do feature, detail on specific methods for providing evidence on these issues is sparse.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Economic evaluation could be a valuable tool to provide evidence for the best healthcare strategies that not only maximize health but also ensure equitable access to care for all. Such evidence would be invaluable in supporting progress towards universal healthcare coverage. Clear guidance is required to ensure evaluations provide evidence on the best strategies to support equitable access to healthcare, but such guidance rarely exists in current best practice and guidance documents.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14467,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"40 1\",\"pages\":\"e59\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11579673/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324000618\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266462324000618","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:国际发展议程越来越多地推动通过全民医保实现人人享有医疗保健。卫生经济评估和卫生技术评估(HTA)可以为实现这一目标提供证据支持,但并没有将公平获取纳入常规考虑范围:方法:我们对卫生经济评估和卫生技术评估指南进行了一次国际范围内的审查,以检查医疗保健的可及性和公平性问题的体现程度、证据建议以及当前指南在支持该领域证据生成方面存在的差距。指南来源于指南库以及提供最佳实践方法指导的国际机构和组织的网站。为开展 HTA 或卫生经济评估提供方法指导的文章也包括在内,除非这些文章没有英文版,也无法获得合适的译文:搜索结果包括 47 份国家指南、4 份国际指南和 9 份独立指南,以及 86 篇提供具体方法指导的文章。在目前的指南中,对公平性和可及性的考虑极为有限。即使有,也很少详细说明就这些问题提供证据的具体方法:讨论:经济评估可以作为一种宝贵的工具,为最佳医疗保健策略提供证据,这些策略不仅能最大限度地提高健康水平,还能确保所有人都能公平地获得医疗保健服务。这些证据对于支持全民医保的进展将是非常宝贵的。需要明确的指导,以确保评价为支持公平获得医疗保健的最佳战略提供证据,但目前的最佳实践和指导文件中很少有这样的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incorporating healthcare access and equity in economic evaluations: a scoping review of guidelines.

Background: International development agendas increasingly push for access to healthcare for all through universal healthcare coverage. Health economic evaluations and health technology assessment (HTA) could provide evidence to support this but do not routinely incorporate consideration of equitable access.

Methods: We undertook an international scoping review of health economic evaluation and HTA guidelines to examine how well issues of healthcare access and equity are represented, evidence recommendations, and gaps in current guidance to support evidence generation in this area. Guidelines were sourced from guideline repositories and websites of international agencies and organizations providing best practice methods guidance. Articles providing methods guidance for the conduct of HTA, or health economic evaluation, were included, except where they were not available in English and a suitable translation could not be obtained.

Results: The search yielded forty-seven national, four international, and nine independent guidelines, along with eighty-six articles providing specific methods guidance. The inclusion of equity and access considerations in current guidance is extremely limited. Where they do feature, detail on specific methods for providing evidence on these issues is sparse.

Discussion: Economic evaluation could be a valuable tool to provide evidence for the best healthcare strategies that not only maximize health but also ensure equitable access to care for all. Such evidence would be invaluable in supporting progress towards universal healthcare coverage. Clear guidance is required to ensure evaluations provide evidence on the best strategies to support equitable access to healthcare, but such guidance rarely exists in current best practice and guidance documents.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care
International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
15.60%
发文量
116
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care serves as a forum for the wide range of health policy makers and professionals interested in the economic, social, ethical, medical and public health implications of health technology. It covers the development, evaluation, diffusion and use of health technology, as well as its impact on the organization and management of health care systems and public health. In addition to general essays and research reports, regular columns on technology assessment reports and thematic sections are published.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信