Does the public think it is reasonable to wait for more evidence before funding innovative health technologies? The case of PET scanning in Ontario
Does the public think it is reasonable to wait for more evidence before funding innovative health technologies? The case of PET scanning in Ontario
复制标题
DOI：
10.1017/s0266462310000024
复制
发表时间：
2010-04-01
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Martin, Doug
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chafe, Roger;Merali, Farhan;Martin, Doug
目标：许多创新卫生技术没有足够的证据基础来充分评估其益处。一些国家的资助者一直在探索允许临时或部分覆盖这些技术的安排，但这只是作为进一步评估的一部分。如果这些安排要保持可行，在获得足够证据之前，公众对限制获得创新技术的安排的支持至关重要。该项目的另一个目标是调查公众对以下案例的看法：在有足够的证据证明承保决定合理之前，患者的公共资助获得创新医疗技术的机会被推迟。所考虑的案例是安大略省（加拿大）政府决定限制使用正电子发射断层扫描（PET）扫描，直到获得进一步的证据。方法：该案例由多伦多健康政策公民委员会的 26 名成员审议，并对个别委员会成员进行了后续调查。结果：大多数委员会成员同意政府采取的方法是合理的，并且符合公民的最大利益。该委员会确实对该案的某些方面表示了担忧，包括获取进一步证据所需的时间。结论：公众对限制新技术获取安排的支持可能会有所不同，具体取决于所提议的具体安排的细节。深思熟虑的公共对话可以有效地用来确定公众最有可能支持的案例。
Objectives: Many innovative health technologies do not have a sufficient evidence-base to allow for adequate assessment of their benefits. Funders in several countries have been exploring arrangements that allow for temporary or partial coverage of these technologies, but only as part of a further evaluation. The public's support of arrangements that restrict access to innovative technology until sufficient evidence is available is crucial if these arrangements are going to remain viable. The project's other objective is to examine the lay public's views on a case in which patients' publicly funded access to an innovative health technology is being delayed until there is sufficient evidence to justify a coverage decision. The case considered is the Ontario (Canada) government's decision to restrict access to positron emission tomography (PET) scans until further evidence becomes available.Methods: The case-was deliberated on by twenty-six members of the Toronto Health Policy Citizens' Council, with a follow-up survey administered to individual council members.Results: The majority of council members agreed that the approach taken by the government was reasonable and in the best interests of its citizens. The council did express concerns regarding certain aspects of the case, including about the length of time it is taking to obtain further evidence.Conclusions: Public support for arrangements that limit access to new technologies will likely vary depending on the details of the specific arrangement being proposed. Deliberative public dialogue can be effectively used to identify cases the general public is most likely to support.