首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Elsevier Sponsored Documents >Are life-extending treatments for terminal illnesses a special case? Exploring choices and societal viewpoints
【2h】

Are life-extending treatments for terminal illnesses a special case? Exploring choices and societal viewpoints

机译:绝症的延长寿命的治疗是否是特例?探索选择和社会观点

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Criteria used by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) to assess life-extending, end-of-life (EoL) treatments imply that health gains from such treatments are valued more than other health gains. Despite claims that the policy is supported by societal values, evidence from preference elicitation studies is mixed and in-depth research has shown there are different societal viewpoints. Few studies elicit preferences for policies directly or combine different approaches to understand preferences.Survey questions were designed to investigate support for NICE EoL guidance at national and regional levels. These ‘Decision Rule’ and ‘Treatment Choice’ questions were administered to an online sample of 1496 UK respondents in May 2014. The same respondents answered questions designed to elicit their agreement with three viewpoints (previously identified and described) in relation to provision of EoL treatments for terminally ill patients. We report the findings of these choice questions and examine how they relate to each other and respondents' viewpoints.The Decision Rule questions described three policies: DA – a standard ‘value for money’ test, applied to all health technologies; DB – giving special consideration to all treatments for terminal illnesses; and DC – giving special consideration to specific categories of treatments for terminal illnesses e.g. life extension (as in NICE EoL guidance) or those that improve quality-of-life (QoL). Three Treatment Choices were presented: TA – improving QoL for patients with a non-terminal illness; TB – extending life for EoL patients; and TC – improving QoL at the EoL.DC received most support (45%) with most respondents giving special consideration to EoL only when treatments improved QoL. The most commonly preferred treatment choices were TA (51%) and TC (43%). Overall, this study challenges claims about public support for NICE's EoL guidance and the focus on life extension at EoL and substantiates existing evidence of plurality in societal values.
机译:美国国家卫生与医疗保健研究院(NICE)使用的评估寿命延长,寿命终止(EoL)治疗的标准表明,这种治疗所带来的健康收益比其他健康收益更有价值。尽管有人声称该政策受到社会价值观的支持,但偏好激发研究的证据却是混杂的,而且深入的研究表明存在不同的社会观点。很少有研究会直接引起人们对政策的偏好,或者结合不同的方法来理解偏好。调查问题旨在调查国家和地区对NICE EoL指南的支持。这些“决策规则”和“治疗选择”问题于2014年5月对1496个英国受访者的在线样本进行了管理。这些受访者回答了旨在征求他们对提供EoL的三种观点(先前已确定和描述)的同意的问题。绝症患者的治疗方法。我们报告这些选择问题的发现,并研究它们之间的相互关系以及受访者的观点。“决策规则”问题描述了三项政策:DA –适用于所有医疗技术的标准“物有所值”测试; DB –特别考虑所有针对绝症的治疗方法;和DC –特别考虑特定类型的绝症治疗方法,例如延长寿命(如NICE EoL指南中所述)或改善生活质量(QoL)的寿命。提出了三种治疗选择:TA –改善非绝症患者的生活质量;结核病–延长EoL患者的寿命;以及TC –提高EoL的QoL。DC得到最多的支持(45%),只有当治疗改善QoL时,大多数受访者才会特别考虑EoL。最常用的治疗选择是TA(51%)和TC(43%)。总体而言,这项研究挑战了有关公众支持NICE的EoL指导以及关注EoL延长寿命的主张,并证实了现有的社会价值多元证据。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号