|
KMID : 1146320160040010008
|
|
Journal of Health Technology Assessment
2016 Volume.4 No. 1 p.8 ~ p.13
|
|
|
Who Is the Worse Off in Health Care Resource Allocation?
|
|
Bae Eun-Young
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
There is a broad consensus on the idea that multiple criteria should be considered in the reimbursement decision making. However, there are limited studies on what constitutes the value of medical technologies, and who should be given additional priority over others. For fair and ethically acceptable decision-making, we need to explore the public views on the priority setting criteria and their trade-offs. Recently, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published a consultation paper on the value-based assessment, where it recommended a valuation scheme which incorporates the burden of illness and a wider societal impact. Two criteria are in contrast to the current ‘end of life’ criteria, and there was a great deal of controversy over who is the worse-off. In Norway, the third Norwegian Committee in Priority Setting in the Health Sector published a comprehensive framework for priority setting. Among the three priority-setting criteria, the most controversial one was the health-loss criterion. Whether to consider only present and future health loss or lifetime health loss including past health was a point at issue.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
Resource allocation, Value-based assessment, Priority-setting, Health loss, Reimbursement decision
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|
|