NICE의 설립과 변화를 통해 살펴본 영국 보건의료기술평가의 발전 배경과 과제
How the Health Technology Assessment Has Developed in the UK: Implications of NICE’s Experience
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
NICE is the most influential health technology assessment (HTA) organization in the world. This study reviews the brief history of NICE and explores how an institution like NICE has been created and expanded its role, interacting with the institutional and socioeconomic environment. Factors that contributed to the UK’s health technology assessment system include its long-standing empirical academic tradition, effective mobilization of human resources through changes in research and development strategies, the influence of medical publications such as BMJ and Lancet and their support for HTA, and the centralized health care system. NICE, which was created to solve the “postcode lottery” issues, has faced several challenges since its launch, but its achievement are recognized both domestically and internationally and has continued to expand the scope of its activities. Political circles have been able to avoid responsibility for uncomfortable decisions by taking technocratic approaches, and NICE has gained some recognition from stakeholders by emphasizing transparency and communication with stakeholders from the beginning of its establishment. However, because rationing itself is a political decision, the controversy surrounding the NICE appraisal has continued, and NICE has several challenges at hand.
Abstract
NICE is the most influential health technology assessment (HTA) organization in the world. This study reviews the brief history of NICE and explores how an institution like NICE has been created and expanded its role, interacting with the institutional and socioeconomic environment. Factors that contributed to the UK’s health technology assessment system include its long-standing empirical academic tradition, effective mobilization of human resources through changes in research and development strategies, the influence of medical publications such as BMJ and Lancet and their support for HTA, and the centralized health care system. NICE, which was created to solve the “postcode lottery” issues, has faced several challenges since its launch, but its achievement are recognized both domestically and internationally and has continued to expand the scope of its activities. Political circles have been able to avoid responsibility for uncomfortable decisions by taking technocratic approaches, and NICE has gained some recognition from stakeholders by emphasizing transparency and communication with stakeholders from the beginning of its establishment. However, because rationing itself is a political decision, the controversy surrounding the NICE appraisal has continued, and NICE has several challenges at hand.
참고문헌 (36)
- Banta D, "History of HTA: introduction", Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 25(Suppl 1), pp.1~6 (2009)
- Eddy D, "Health technology assessment and evidence-based medicine:what are we talking about?", Value Health, 12(Suppl 2), pp.S6~S7 (2009)
- Sackett DL, "Evidence based medicine : what it is and what it isn’t", BMJ, 312, pp.71~72 (1996)
- Drummond M, "Challenges faced in transferring economic evaluations to middle income countries", Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 31, pp.442~448 (2015)
- Timmins N, "A terrible beauty: a short history of NICE" (2016), Amarin Printing and Publishing Public Co. Ltd
- "inahta.org"[URL]
- Torbica A, "Do social values and institutional context shape the use of economic evaluation in reimbursement decisions? An empirical analysis", Value Health, 23, pp.17~24 (2020)
- Le Pen C, "Is there a “continental” view of health economics evaluation?", Eur J Health Econ, 10, pp.121~123 (2009)
- Stevens A, "Health technology assessment in England and Wales", Int J Technol Assess Health Care, 20, pp.11~24 (2004)
- Stevens A, "Health technology assessment : history and demand", J Public Health Med, 25, pp.98~101 (2003)
- Chalkidou K, "Using comparative effectiveness research to inform policy and practice in the UK NHS : past, present and future", Pharmacoeconomics, 28, pp.799~811 (2010)
- "nihr.ac.uk"[URL]
- Buxton MJ, "Economic evaluation and decision making in the UK", Pharmacoeconomics, 24, pp.1133~1142 (2006)
- Syrett K, "A technocratic fix to the"legitimacy problem"? The Blair government and health care rationing in the United Kingdom", J Health Polit Policy Law, 28, pp.715~746 (2003)
- Steinbrook R, "Saying no isn’t NICE-the travails of Britain’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence", N Engl J Med, 359, pp.1977~1981 (2008)
- Dent THS, "From guidance to practice : why NICE is not enough", BMJ, 324, pp.842~845 (2002)
- "nice.org.uk"[URL]
- Rawlins MD, "5 NICE years", Lancet, 365, pp.904~908 (2005)
- Rawlins M, "In pursuit of quality : the National Institute for Clinical Excellence", Lancet, 353, pp.1079~1082 (1999)
- Horton R, "NICE : a step forward in the quality of NHS care", Lancet, 353, pp.1028~1029 (1999)
- Maynard A, "Challenges for the National Institute for Clinical Excellence", BMJ, 329, pp.227~229 (2004)
- Goodman NW, "Rational rationing", BMJ, 321, pp.1356~ (2000)
- Smith R, "The failings of NICE", BMJ, 321, pp.1363~1364 (2000)
- Corbacho B, "Health economic decision-making : a comparison between UK and Spain", Br Med Bull, 103, pp.5~20 (2012)
- Ford JA, "NICE guidance : a comparative study of the introduction of the single technology appraisal process and comparison with guidance from Scottish Medicines Consortium", BMJ Open, 2, pp.e000671~ (2012)
- Barbieri M, "Who does the numbers? The role of third-party technology assessment to inform health systems’decision-making about the funding of health technologies", Value Health, 12, pp.193~201 (2009)
- Abraham J, "Partial progress : governing the pharmaceutical industry and the NHS, 1948-2008", J Health Polit Policy Law, 34, pp.931~977 (2009)
- Buller JR, "Managing wicked problems : the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and the depoliticisation of health care rationing", Commonwealth Innovations Review, 23, pp.4~13 (2017)
- Hashem F, "Decision making in NICE single technological appraisals : how does NICE incorporate patient perspectives", Health Expect, 21, pp.128~137 (2018)
- Barham L, "Public and patient involvement at the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence", Patient, 4, pp.1~10 (2011)
- Brown PR, "The dark side of hope and trust : constructed expectations and the value-for-money regulation of new medicines", Health Sociol Rev, 20, pp.410~422 (2011)
- Ferner RE, "How NICE may be outflanked", BMJ, 332, pp.1268~1271 (2006)
- Crinson I, "The politics of regulation within the ‘modernized’ NHS : the case of beta interferon and the ‘cost-effective’ treatment of multiple sclerosis", Crit Soc Policy, 24, pp.30~49 (2004)
- Dillon A, "NICE, the NHS, and cancer drugs", JAMA, 319, pp.767~768 (2018)
- Edwards N, "NICE at 20", BMJ, 364, pp.l1343~ (2019)
- Löblová O, "The emerging social science literature on health technology assessment : a narrative review", Value Health, 23, pp.3~9 (2020)