...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>BMJ: British medical journal >Economic evaluation of health interventions
【24h】

Economic evaluation of health interventions

机译：经济评价的卫生干预措施

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The choice of perspective is important in the economic evaluation of healthcare interventions. For example, in the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence's (NICE) technology appraisal of drugs for Alzheimer's disease, a major discussion point was whether the costs falling on care givers should be included as well as costs to the NHS.The main argument for adopting a restrictive perspective is that the budget for the NHS is meant to be for improving health. Therefore, the relevant consideration in evaluating interventions is the opportunity cost (in other treatments forgone) on the healthcare budget. But alternatively shouldn't the full social benefits of healthcare interventions be considered? If healthcare interventions have benefits outside the healthcare sector-for example, in the criminal justice system, transport sector, or education-shouldn't these be tracked and any budgetary adjustments sorted out separately? And shouldn't health care aim to provide benefits to families and carers as well as the patient?
机译：角度的选择是重要的医疗干预措施的经济评价。例如,在美国国立卫生研究所和临床的(NICE)技术阿尔茨海默病药物的评价主要讨论点是成本落在护理人员应包括英国国民健康保险制度的成本。采用限制性视角的NHS的预算是为提高健康。评价干预措施的机会成本(在其他疗法放弃)在医疗保健上预算。社会福利的医疗干预考虑吗?好处之外的医疗部门例如,在刑事司法系统中,交通部门或education-shouldn没有这些跟踪和解决任何预算调整分开吗?提供福利的家庭和护理人员病人吗?

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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