Economic evidence for evidence-based practice

被引:21
|
作者
Stone, PW
Curran, CR
Bakken, S
机构
[1] Columbia Univ, Sch Nursing, New York, NY 10032 USA
[2] Alpha Zeta, New York, NY USA
[3] Columbia Univ, Informat Program, New York, NY 10032 USA
关键词
cost-utility analysis; cost-effectiveness; quality-adjusted life years; evidence-based practice; economic evaluation;
D O I
10.1111/j.1547-5069.2002.00277.x
中图分类号
R47 [护理学];
学科分类号
1011 ;
摘要
Purpose: To explicate (a) the types of economic analyses available to nurses, (b) the measurement of costs in different types of economic evaluations, (c) recommendations for standardization, and (d) the assessment of economic evaluations for evidence-based practice. Methods: Five types of economic analyses are reviewed. Recommendations for standardization of cost-effectiveness analyses are included as well as a worksheet for use in critiquing economic evaluations for validity and applicability to clinical settings. Findings: Limited knowledge and a lack of consistent approaches to economic analyses are evident in the nursing and health care literature. However, nurses have not contributed to the conduct of rigorous economic evaluations or research to the extent found in other health care disciplines. Conclusions: Basing nursing practice on the best available evidence is now the expected standard of care. Applying economic evidence to practice requires understanding the methods used to conduct economic evaluations and to analyze the rigor of such evaluations.
引用
收藏
页码:277 / 282
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条