Setting Priorities for Health Technologies Assessment A Model Process (1992) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES
3 GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Pages 50-56
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 50... ...
For instance, clinician users of technology assessments seek comparative information based on a given clinical condition to help them in decision making. This issue is discussed further in a later section of this chapter.
|
From page 51... ...
.) Four elements of the public interest deserve consideration in determining which set of technologies should take precedence when assessment resources are limited: · the extent to which health care services can reduce pain, suffering, and premature death; increase health, functional capacity, and life expectancy; or maintain the functioning of those who are permanently impaired; sorts: good)
|
From page 52... ...
Potential to Reduce Pain, Suffering, and Premature Death A primary objective of health care is alleviating and preventing the pain and suffering that are part of illness and preventing premature death. Technology assessment as a primary source of information about the extent to which health care services can effectively achieve these ends-plays a critical role in supporting this primary objective.
|
From page 53... ...
This goal is served whenever information is produced Hat leads to greater equity of health care delivery, especially in terms of the distribution of health care services to those who are underserved, or to more information about a problem that, because it affects a very small population, would not otherwise be the subject of investigation. The priority to be accorded an assessment depends not only on the magnitude of inequity but also on the sensitivity of that inequity to better information.
|
From page 54... ...
If technology assessment efforts are to strive to produce patient-specific recommendations, each candidate for assessment must be specified precisely enough for the assessment to serve a clinician's needs. Thus, the answer to the above question might eventually be tied to a specific patient population for example, "PET scanning is the most costeffective diagnostic test to perform for a 68-year-old male, type-II diabetic patient with new onset of exercise-induced substernal burning." Specification at the level of individual patient characteristics may seem only a distant goal of technology assessment, but the health care system must attempt to achieve it if the assessment and its products are to be useful to the clinician and his or her patients (e.g., McNeil and Abrams, 1986~.
|
From page 55... ...
Third, the process must be defensible. Because of the competing demands for technology assessment resources, those who assign priorities must be able to justify the process.
|
From page 56... ...
For a public agency, the values of the public that the agency serves need to be incorporated into the process. For OHTA, such a process would require the assembling of information about the potential to improve health outcomes, to reduce inappropriate expenditures, to redress inequity among those receiving health care, and to inform special social issues.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.