本文对英国、美国、法国、德国、瑞典和加拿大六个发达国家的卫生技术评估（HTA）在医疗保健体系中的发展进行了深入探讨。HTA作为提高医疗决策科学性、经济性和公平性的重要工具,已在上述国家得到广泛应用。这些国家的实践展示了综合评估方法、多方参与、平衡公私部门角色、地方自主性和强调临床及成本效益的重要性。我国作为全球人口大国,面临着医疗资源有限、医保支出不断增加等挑战,借鉴并本土化这些国家的HTA经验有望提升我国医保部门医疗决策的质量,促进整个体系的公平和可持续发展。本文旨在为我国的医疗保健政策制定者、研究人员和从业人员提供关于国际最佳实践经验的深入洞察,为国内外学术界和政策制定者提供有价值的参考。
Abstract
This article provides an in-depth exploration of the development of health technology assessment (HTA) in the healthcare systems of the United Kingdom, the United States, France, Germany, Sweden, and Canada. HTA, as a critical tool for enhancing scientific, economic, and equitable aspects of medical decision-making, has been widely adopted in these nations. The practice in these countries demonstrates the significance of comprehensive assessment methods, multi-stakeholder participation, balancing the roles of the public and private sectors, local autonomy, and an emphasis on clinical and cost-effectiveness. As one of the most populous countries in the world, China faces challenges such as limited healthcare resources and increasing medical insurance expenditures. Learning from and adapting the HTA experience of these countries could enhance the quality of medical decision-making in China's medical insurance sector, promoting fairness and sustainable development in the entire system. This paper provides policymakers, researchers, and practitioners in China's healthcare sector with deep insights into international best practice, offering valuable references for the academic and policy-making communities both domestically and internationally.
关键词
卫生技术评估 /
医疗保障 /
启示
Key words
health technology assessment /
healthcare security /
insight
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.title}}
{{custom_sec.content}}
参考文献
[1] O'ROURKE B, OORTWIJN W, SCHULLER T.The new definition of health technology assessment: a milestone in international collaboration[J].International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2020, 36(3):187-190.
[2] HAO Y, THOMAS A.Health technology assessment and comparative effectiveness research: a pharmaceutical industry perspective[J].Expert review of pharmacoeconomics and outcomes research, 2013, 13(4):447-454.
[3] BELETSI A, KOUTRAFOURI V, KARAMPLI E, et al.Comparing use of health technology assessment in pharmaceutical policy among earlier and more recent adopters in the European Union[J].Value in health regional issues, 2018(16):81-91.
[4] BANTA D.The development of health technology assessment[J].Health policy, 2003, 63(2):121-132.
[5] BANTA D, JONSSON E.History of HTA: introduction[J].International journal of technology assessment in health care, 2009(25):1-6.
[6] FONTRIER AM, VISINTIN E, KANAVOS P.Similarities and differences in health technology assessment systems and implications for coverage decisions: evidence from 32 countries[J].PharmacoEconomics open, 2022 (6):315-328.
[7] Department of Health.Report of the triennial review for the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence[R].London: Department of Health, 2015.
[8] NICE.Technology appraisal decisions[EB/OL].(2019-04-01)[2023-11-30].https://www.nice.org.uk/About/What-we-do/Our-Programmes/NICE-guidance/NICE-technology-appraisal-guidance.
[9] NICE.Fast track appraisal[R].2017.
[10] NICE.Guide to the methods of technology appraisal[R].2013.
[11] NICE.Technology appraisal guidance: Summary of decisions[R].2017.
[12] KALTENTHALER E, PAPAIOANNOU D, BOLAND A, et al.The national institute for health and clinical excellence single technology appraisal process: lessons from the first 4 years[J].Value health, 2011, 14(8): 1158-1165.
[13] Pharmaceutical Technology.NICE makeover: a new look for the UK's HTAs[EB/OL].(2022-08-19)[2023-11-30].https://www.pharmaceutical-technology.com/features/nices-makeover-a-new-look-for-uk-htas/.
[14] SALAS-VEGA S, BERTLING A, MOSSIALOS E.A comparative study of drug listing recommendations and the decision-making process in Australia, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the UK[J].Health policy, 2016, 120(10): 1104-1114.
[15] NICE.Guide to the technology appraisal and highly specialized technologies appeal process[R].2017.
[16] 姚嘉奇,周挺,管欣,等.英国NICE卫生技术评估介绍及对我国医保目录动态调整的启示[J].中国循证医学杂志,2018,18(09):984-989.
[17] 李小亭,张秋.美国卫生技术评估的发展研究及借鉴[J].企业科技与发展,2018(11):247-248.
[18] AHRQ.Health technology assessment[EB/OL].(2021-08-27)[2023-11-30].https://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/ta/index.html.
[19] HAS.About HAS[EB/OL].(2013-01-25)[2023-11-30].https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/r_1455134/en.
[20] HAS.Transparency committee[EB/OL].(2021-01-29)[2023-11-30].https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/c_1729421/en/transparency-committee.
[21] HAS.Medical Device and Health Technology Evaluation Committee (CNEDiMTS)[EB/OL].(2019-09-10)[2023-11-30].https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/c_2036238/en/medical-device-and-health-technology-evaluation-committee-cnedimts.
[22] 谢金平,邵蓉.法国卫生技术评估和定价与偿付政策研究及对我国的启示[J].中国医疗保险,2020(8):65-70.
[23] 孙薇薇,蒋虹丽.创新药定价管理国际经验及其对我国的启示[J].价格理论与实践,2015(5):100-102.
[24] Commission nationale d'évaluation des dispositifs médicaux et des technologies de santé.visés à l'article L.165-1 du code de la sécurité sociale[EB/OL].(2023-09-28)[2023-11-30].https://www.has-sante.fr/jcms/c_419486/qu-est-ce-que-la-cnedimts.
[25] DIMDI.DAHTA-Datenbank[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.bfarm.de/DE/Das-BfArM/Aufgaben/HTA/Datenbankinformation/_node.html.
[26] 吕兰婷,付荣华.德国卫生技术评估决策转化路径及方法探析[J].中国卫生政策研究,2017,10(4):51-56.
[27] IQWiG.Aufgaben und Ziele des IQWiG[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.iqwig.de/ueber-uns/aufgaben-und-ziele/.
[28] IQWiG.Methodenpapier[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.iqwig.de/ueber-uns/methoden/methodenpapier/.
[29] G-BA.Beratungsantrag[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.g-ba.de/ueber-den-gba/arbeitsweise/beratungsantrag/.
[30] 吴久鸿,赵绯丽,岳晓萌,等.基本医疗保险用药管理暂行办法:动态调整之退出机制思考[J].世界临床药物,2020,41(8):629-632.
[31] 王雅楠,彭小宸,程玥,等.德国医保支付价格管理及对我国的启示[J].中国新药杂志,2016,25(3):262-265.
[32] 郑学宝,李大平.国外医疗技术准入制度比较[J].中国医院管理,2006,26(4):15-17.
[33] 姚立新,马兰,郑强.瑞典药品定价与报销政策研究[J].中国新药杂志,2013,22(8):893-899+909.
[34] SBU.The process for conducting a systematic review[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.sbu.se/en/method2/the-process-for-conducting-a-systematic-review/.
[35] SBU.Core outcome sets (COS)[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://www.sbu.se/en/method2/other-methods-used-by-sbu/core-outcome-sets-cos/.
[36] EUPATI.HTA systems in Europe[EB/OL].[2023-11-30].https://toolbox.eupati.eu/resources/hta-systems-in-europe/.
[37] 裴婕,路云,周萍,等.瑞典基本药物目录的发展及启示[J].卫生经济研究,2018(8):46-48.
[38] 孙薇薇,蒋虹丽.创新药定价管理国际经验及其对我国的启示[J].价格理论与实践,2015(5):100-102.
[39] BELETSI A, KOUTRAFOURI V, KARAMPLI E, et al.Comparing use of health technology assessment in pharmaceutical policy among earlier and more recent adopters in the European union[J].Value health reg issues, 2018, 16: 81-91.
[40] SORENSON C, CHALKIDOU K.Reflections on the evolution of health technology assessment in Europe[J].Health Econ Policy Law, 2012, 7(1): 25-45.
[41] CADTH.Procedures for CADTH Reimbursement Reviews[R].2022, 3.
[42] CADTH.Procedures for the CADTH panCanadian oncology drug review[R].2020: 6.
[43] 陈雅静,应晓华,唐雪,等.加拿大卫生技术评估在医保领域应用的经验与启示[J].中国卫生事业管理,2023,40(10):751-753+779.
[44] 王梦骁,邵蓉.加拿大统一药品审评制度的效果评价及启示[J].卫生经济研究,2016(4):41-44.
[45] 常峰,席悦,李世勇,等.加拿大品牌药价格联合谈判机制及其对我国的启示[J].价格管理与实践,2016(3):83-86.
[46] 施文凯,吕兰婷.基本医疗保险循证决策体系构建:卫生技术评估的作用[J].中国卫生政策研究,2019,12(11):73-79.
[47] 郭武栋,吴晶,王海银,等.HTA在我国医保决策中的应用思考[J].中国医疗保险,2022(04):12-17.
[48] 健康点.国家卫健委,医保局共识:将卫生技术评估用于医保准入[EB/OL].(2018-12-01)[2023-11-30].http://www.healthpoint.cn/article_detail/65655.
[49] 中华人民共和国中央人民政府关于发布2018年抗癌药医保准入专项谈判药品范围的通告[EB/OL].(2018-08-17)[2023-11-30].https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2018-08/17/content_5314405.htm.
[50] 王昊德,罗雅双,覃肖潇,等.卫生技术评估用于耗材准入和支付的国际经验与启示[J].中国医疗保险,2022(04):118-122.
[51] 顾娟.基于医院技术评估的医用耗材管理探索[J].冶金管理,2021(03):93-94+96.
[52] AKEHURST RL, ABADIE E, RENAUDIN N, et al.Variation in health technology assessment and reimbursement processes in Europe[J].Value in health, 2017, 20(1): 67-76.
[53] FOWOKAN A, GIOSA J, SAARI M, et al.Mapping a comprehensive assessment tool to a holistic definition of health for person-centred care planning in home care: a modified eDelphi study.BMC health services research, 2023 (23): 1268.
[54] 李环,李程洪,刘红海,等.基于支付意愿的卫生经济学评价中成本效果阈值研究系统评价[J].医学与社会,2021,34(07):36-41.
