Literature DB >> 27565268

Clinical Guidelines: A NICE Way to Introduce Cost-Effectiveness Considerations?

Michael Drummond1.   

Abstract

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in the United Kingdom initiated its clinical guidelines program in 2001 and more than 200 guidelines have been produced to date. As with most of NICE's other programs, the clinical guidelines program also must take into account the relative costs and benefits of interventions when deciding whether to recommend them. The three main advantages of the program are that 1) it represents an important collaboration with the medical profession, thereby increasing the likelihood of recommendations being adopted; 2) the guidelines provide an opportunity to review all aspects of the clinical pathway, rather than focusing on only the adoption of a new technology; and 3) the guidelines offer the potential to discuss disinvestment as well as new investment. All the guidelines contain a systematic review of the relevant economic evaluation literature, and the 12 guidelines published from January 1 to August 31, 2015, contain 28 de novo economic analyses. The main challenges encountered in the guidelines program are that 1) there is an inevitable tension in advising on the quality of care that individual patients could expect while recognizing the broader public health objectives of equity, fairness, and efficiency; 2) the impact of economics is sometimes lessened because of the lack of time to conduct de novo analyses; and 3) unlike NICE's technology appraisal program, the adoption of recommendations is not mandatory for the UK National Health Service.
Copyright © 2016 International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research (ISPOR). Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  clinical practice guidelines; cost; cost-effectiveness analysis; oncology; value frameworks

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27565268     DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2016.04.020

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Value Health        ISSN: 1098-3015            Impact factor:   5.725


  7 in total

1.  Mind the gap: Mapping variation between national and local clinical practice guidelines for acute paediatric asthma from the United Kingdom and the Netherlands.

Authors:  Charlotte Koldeweij; Nicholas Appelbaum; Carmen Rodriguez Gonzalvez; Joppe Nijman; Ruud Nijman; Ruchi Sinha; Ian Maconochie; Jonathan Clarke
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-17       Impact factor: 3.752

Review 2.  Systematic review of guideline-recommended medications prescribed for treatment of low back pain.

Authors:  Morgan R Price; Zachary A Cupler; Cheryl Hawk; Edward M Bednarz; Sheryl A Walters; Clinton J Daniels
Journal:  Chiropr Man Therap       Date:  2022-05-13

Review 3.  Methodological issues in economic evaluations of emergency transport systems in low-income and middle-income countries.

Authors:  Richard Lilford; Dmitri Nepogodiev; Peter J Chilton; Samuel I Watson; Darius Erlangga; Peter Diggle; Alan J Girling; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2021-03

4.  Ensuring quality in contextualised cancer management guidelines for resource-constraint settings: using a systematic approach.

Authors:  Manju Sengar; C S Pramesh; Abha Mehndiratta; Sudeep Shah; Anusheel Munshi; D K Vijaykumar; Ajay Puri; Beela Mathew; Ramandeep Singh Arora; Priya Kumari T; Kedar Deodhar; Santosh Menon; Sridhar Epari; Omshree Shetty; Francoise Cluzeau
Journal:  BMJ Glob Health       Date:  2022-08

5.  Access criteria for anti-TNF agents in spondyloarthritis: influence on comparative 1-year cost-effectiveness estimates.

Authors:  Stephanie Harvard; Daphne Guh; Nick Bansback; Pascal Richette; Alain Saraux; Bruno Fautrel; Aslam Anis
Journal:  Cost Eff Resour Alloc       Date:  2017-09-07

6.  Prioritising, Ranking and Resource Implementation - A Normative Analysis.

Authors:  Lars Sandman
Journal:  Int J Health Policy Manag       Date:  2018-06-01

7.  What Role Can Process Mining Play in Recurrent Clinical Guidelines Issues? A Position Paper.

Authors:  Roberto Gatta; Mauro Vallati; Carlos Fernandez-Llatas; Antonio Martinez-Millana; Stefania Orini; Lucia Sacchi; Jacopo Lenkowicz; Mar Marcos; Jorge Munoz-Gama; Michel A Cuendet; Berardino de Bari; Luis Marco-Ruiz; Alessandro Stefanini; Zoe Valero-Ramon; Olivier Michielin; Tomas Lapinskas; Antanas Montvila; Niels Martin; Erica Tavazzi; Maurizio Castellano
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-09-11       Impact factor: 3.390

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.