DECISION-MAKING ALIGNED WITH RAPID-CYCLE EVALUATION IN HEALTH CARE

被引:12
|
作者
Schneeweiss, Sebastian [1 ]
Shrank, William H. [2 ]
Ruhl, Michael [3 ]
Maclure, Malcolm [4 ]
机构
[1] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Dept Med, Div Pharmacoepidemiol & Pharmacoecon, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[2] CVS Hlth, Woonsocket, RI USA
[3] Aetion Inc, New York, NY USA
[4] Univ British Columbia, Dept Anesthesiol Pharmacol & Therapeut, Vancouver, BC V5Z 1M9, Canada
关键词
Rapid-cycle evaluation; Decision making; Healthcare data analytics; RISK-SHARING ARRANGEMENTS; INFORMATION; MEDICATIONS; MEDICARE; SAFETY; DRUGS; CLOPIDOGREL; PRASUGREL; PAYMENT; DESIGN;
D O I
10.1017/S0266462315000410
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Availability of real-time electronic healthcare data provides new opportunities for rapid-cycle evaluation (RCE) of health technologies, including healthcare delivery and payment programs. We aim to align decision-making processes with stages of RCE to optimize the usefulness and impact of rapid results. Rational decisions about program adoption depend on program effect size in relation to externalities, including implementation cost, sustainability, and likelihood of broad adoption. Methods: Drawing on case studies and experience from drug safety monitoring, we examine how decision makers have used scientific evidence on complex interventions in the past. We clarify how RCE alters the nature of policy decisions; develop the RAPID framework for synchronizing decision-maker activities with stages of RCE; and provide guidelines on evidence thresholds for incremental decision-making. Results: In contrast to traditional evaluations, RCE provides early evidence on effectiveness and facilitates a stepped approach to decision making in expectation of future regularly updated evidence. RCE allows for identification of trends in adjusted effect size. It supports adapting a program in midstream in response to interim findings, or adapting the evaluation strategy to identify true improvements earlier. The 5-step RAPID approach that utilizes the cumulating evidence of program effectiveness over time could increase policy-makers' confidence in expediting decisions. Conclusions: RCE enables a step-wise approach to HTA decision-making, based on gradually emerging evidence, reducing delays in decision-making processes after traditional one-time evaluations.
引用
收藏
页码:214 / 222
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [11] Personality and health care decision-making style
    Flynn, Kathryn E.
    Smith, Maureen A.
    [J]. JOURNALS OF GERONTOLOGY SERIES B-PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES, 2007, 62 (05): : P261 - P267
  • [12] Children, families, and health care decision-making
    McHaffie, HE
    [J]. JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ETHICS, 2000, 26 (04) : 291 - 292
  • [13] Women's decision-making about their health care: views over the life cycle
    Brown, JB
    Carroll, J
    Boon, H
    Marmoreo, J
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2002, 48 (03) : 225 - 231
  • [14] The irrelevance of inference: a decision-making approach to the stochastic evaluation of health care technologies
    Claxton, K
    [J]. JOURNAL OF HEALTH ECONOMICS, 1999, 18 (03) : 341 - 364
  • [15] The effects of structures on decision-making policies in health care
    Tuulonen, A
    [J]. ACTA OPHTHALMOLOGICA SCANDINAVICA, 2005, 83 (05): : 611 - 617
  • [16] Critical approaches to research on decision-making in health care
    Murtagh, M.
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGY & HEALTH, 2010, 25 : 63 - 63
  • [17] SIMULATION MODELING AND HEALTH-CARE DECISION-MAKING
    KLEIN, RW
    DITTUS, RS
    ROBERTS, SD
    WILSON, JR
    [J]. MEDICAL DECISION MAKING, 1993, 13 (04) : 347 - 354
  • [18] INVOLVING CONSUMERS IN HEALTH-CARE DECISION-MAKING
    SHACKLEY, P
    RYAN, M
    [J]. HEALTH CARE ANALYSIS, 1995, 3 (03) : 196 - 204
  • [19] THE USE OF QALYS IN HEALTH-CARE DECISION-MAKING
    LOOMES, G
    MCKENZIE, L
    [J]. SOCIAL SCIENCE & MEDICINE, 1989, 28 (04) : 299 - 308
  • [20] The decision-making process of health care utilization in Mexico
    Brown, CJ
    Pagán, JA
    Rodríguez-Oreggia, E
    [J]. HEALTH POLICY, 2005, 72 (01) : 81 - 91