Addressing resource allocation issues in recommendations from clinical practice guideline panels -: Suggestions from an American College of Chest Physicians task force

被引:39
作者
Guyatt, G
Baumann, M
Pauker, S
Halperin, J
Maurer, J
Owens, DK
Tosteson, ANA
Carlin, B
Gutterman, D
Prins, M
Lewis, SZ
Schünemann, H
机构
[1] McMaster Univ, Dept Med, Hamilton, ON L8N 3Z5, Canada
[2] Univ Mississippi, Med Ctr, Jackson, MS 39216 USA
[3] Tufts Univ, New England Med Ctr, Boston, MA 02111 USA
[4] Mt Sinai Med Ctr, New York, NY 10029 USA
[5] Dept Vet Affairs, Palo Alto Hlth Care Syst, Palo Alto, CA USA
[6] Dartmouth Coll Sch Med, Dept Med, Hanover, NH USA
[7] Drexel Univ, Sch Med, Philadelphia, PA 19104 USA
[8] Med Coll Wisconsin, Dept Med, Milwaukee, WI 53226 USA
[9] Amer Coll Chest Phys, Hlth & Sci Policy Comm, Northbrook, IL USA
[10] Univ Maastricht, Dept Clin Epidemiol & Med Technol Assessment, Acad Hosp Maastricht, Maastricht, Netherlands
[11] Italian Natl Canc Inst Regina Elena, Div Clin Res Dev & Informat Translat, Dept Epidemiol, Rome, Italy
关键词
clinical practice guidelines; evidence-based recommendations; resource allocation;
D O I
10.1378/chest.129.1.182
中图分类号
R4 [临床医学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100602 ;
摘要
Most panels that develop clinical practice guidelines are poorly equipped to address resource allocation or cost issues associated with management options. This risks neglect, arbitrariness, lack of transparency, and methodological flaws in consideration of resource allocation. We provide recommendations for guideline panels to promote greater transparency and rigor. We suggest focusing on resource allocation issues for only a limited number of recommendations and provide criteria for selecting those in which economic considerations are likely to influence the direction or strength of the recommendation. Panels should involve a health economist to assist with the systematic review and critical interpretation of relevant economic analyses. They should carefully define the intended audience and may consider issuing alternative recommendations when available resources vary widely across target clinical settings. Targeting a limited number of recommendations for the consideration of resource allocation issues, and ensuring methodologically high-quality review, will best serve guideline panels, and the health-care providers and patients they hope to assist.
引用
收藏
页码:182 / 187
页数:6
相关论文
共 14 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1996, Cost-Effectiveness in Health and Medicine
[2]  
AVORN J, 2004, NAVIGATING 3 DIMENSI, P235
[3]   Differences between perspectives of physicians and patients on anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation: observational study [J].
Devereaux, PJ ;
Anderson, DR ;
Gardner, MJ ;
Putnam, W ;
Flowerdew, GJ ;
Brownell, BF ;
Nagpal, S ;
Cox, JL .
BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2001, 323 (7323) :1218-1221
[4]   CLINICAL ECONOMICS - A GUIDE TO THE ECONOMIC-ANALYSIS OF CLINICAL PRACTICES [J].
EISENBERG, JM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1989, 262 (20) :2879-2886
[5]   Multiattribute and single-attribute utility functions for the health utilities index mark 3 system [J].
Feeny, D ;
Furlong, W ;
Torrance, GW ;
Goldsmith, CH ;
Zhu, ZL ;
DePauw, S ;
Denton, M ;
Boyle, M .
MEDICAL CARE, 2002, 40 (02) :113-128
[6]   Economic foundations of cost-effectiveness analysis [J].
Garber, AM ;
Phelps, CE .
JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1997, 16 (01) :1-31
[7]   Grading strength of recommendations and quality of evidence in clinical guidelines -: Report from an American College of Chest Physicians task force [J].
Guyatt, G ;
Gutterman, D ;
Baumann, MH ;
Addrizzo-Harris, D ;
Hylek, EM ;
Phillips, B ;
Raskob, G ;
Lewis, SZ ;
Schünemann, H .
CHEST, 2006, 129 (01) :174-181
[8]   Problems with the interpretation of pharmacoeconomic analyses - A review of submissions to the Australian pharmaceutical benefits scheme [J].
Hill, SR ;
Mitchell, AS ;
Henry, DA .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 2000, 283 (16) :2116-2121
[9]  
LAUPACIS A, 1992, CAN MED ASSOC J, V146, P473
[10]  
Luce BR, 1996, COST EFFECTIVENESS H, P176