首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Elsevier Sponsored Documents >Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns
【2h】

Using Cost-Effectiveness Analysis to Address Health Equity Concerns

机译:使用成本效益分析解决健康公平问题

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

This articles serves as a guide to using cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) to address health equity concerns. We first introduce the "equity impact plane," a tool for considering trade-offs between improving total health—the objective underpinning conventional CEA—and equity objectives, such as reducing social inequality in health or prioritizing the severely ill. Improving total health may clash with reducing social inequality in health, for example, when effective delivery of services to disadvantaged communities requires additional costs. Who gains and who loses from a cost-increasing health program depends on differences among people in terms of health risks, uptake, quality, adherence, capacity to benefit, and—crucially—who bears the opportunity costs of diverting scarce resources from other uses. We describe two main ways of using CEA to address health equity concerns: 1) equity impact analysis, which quantifies the distribution of costs and effects by equity-relevant variables, such as socioeconomic status, location, ethnicity, sex, and severity of illness; and 2) equity trade-off analysis, which quantifies trade-offs between improving total health and other equity objectives. One way to analyze equity trade-offs is to count the cost of fairer but less cost-effective options in terms of health forgone. Another method is to explore how much concern for equity is required to choose fairer but less cost-effective options using equity weights or parameters. We hope this article will help the health technology assessment community navigate the practical options now available for conducting equity-informative CEA that gives policymakers a better understanding of equity impacts and trade-offs.
机译:本文可作为使用成本效益分析(CEA)解决健康公平问题的指南。我们首先介绍“公平影响平面”,该工具用于考虑在改善整体健康(这是传统CEA的基础)和公平目标(例如减少健康方面的社会不平等或优先考虑重病)之间进行权衡的一种工具。改善整体健康状况可能会与减少健康状况中的社会不平等现象发生冲突,例如,向弱势社区有效提供服务需要额外的费用时。从增加成本的卫生计划中获益和失利的人,取决于人与人之间在健康风险,摄取,质量,依从性,受益能力以及(更重要的是)谁承担从其他用途转移稀缺资源方面的机会成本方面的差异。我们描述了使用CEA解决健康公平问题的两种主要方法:1)公平影响分析,它通过与公平相关的变量(例如社会经济地位,位置,种族,性别和疾病的严重程度)量化成本和影响的分配; 2)权衡取舍分析,它量化了改善整体健康状况和其他权衡目标之间的权衡取舍。分析公平性权衡的一种方法是,就健康放弃而言,计算更公平但成本效益较低的选择的成本。另一种方法是使用股权权重或参数来探索选择公平,但成本效益较低的期权需要多少股权。我们希望本文将帮助卫生技术评估界找到可行的可行方案,以进行公平的信息通报的CEA,从而使决策者更好地了解公平的影响和权衡。

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