Assessment vs. appraisal of ethical aspects of health technology assessment: can the distinction be upheld?

GMS health technology assessment Pub Date : 2014-11-26 eCollection Date: 2014-01-01 DOI:10.3205/hta000121
Lars Sandman, Emelie Heintz
{"title":"Assessment vs. appraisal of ethical aspects of health technology assessment: can the distinction be upheld?","authors":"Lars Sandman,&nbsp;Emelie Heintz","doi":"10.3205/hta000121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>An essential component of health technology assessment (HTA) is the assessment of ethical aspects. In some healthcare contexts, tasks are strictly relegated to different expert groups: the HTA-agencies are limited to assessment of the technology and other actors within the health care sector are responsible for appraisal and recommendations. Ethical aspects of health technologies are considered with reference to values or norms in such a way that may be prescriptive, or offer guidance as to how to act or relate to the issue in question. Given this internal prescriptivity, the distinction between assessment and appraisal seems difficult to uphold, unless the scrutiny stops short of a full ethical analysis of the technology. In the present article we analyse the distinction between assessment and appraisal, using as an example ethical aspects of implementation of GPS-bracelets for people with dementia. It is concluded that for HTA-agencies with a strictly delineated assessment role, the question of how to deal with the internal prescriptivity of ethics may be confusing. A full ethical analysis might result in a definite conclusion as to whether the technology in question is ethically acceptable or not, thereby limiting choices for decision-makers, who are required to uphold certain ethical values and norms. At the same time, depending on the exact nature of such a conclusion, different action strategies can be supported. A positive appraisal within HTA could result in a decision on mandatory implementation, or funding of the technology, thereby making it available to patients, or decisions to allow and even encourage the use of the technology (even if someone else will have to fund it). A neutral appraisal, giving no definite answer as to whether implementation is recommended or not, could result in a laissez-faire attitude towards the technology. A negative appraisal could result in a decision to discourage or even prohibit implementation. This paper presents an overview of the implications of different outcomes of the ethical analysis on appraisal of the technology. It is considered important to uphold the distinction between assessment and appraisal, primarily to avoid the influence of preconceived values and political interests on the assessment. Hence, as long as it is not based on the subjective value judgments of the HTA-agency (or its representative), such an appraising conclusion would not seem to conflict with the rationale for the separation of these tasks. Moreover, it should be noted that if HTA agencies abstain from including full ethical analyses because of the risk of issuing an appraisal, they may fail to provide the best possible basis for decision-makers. Hence, we argue that as long as the ethical analysis and its conclusions are presented transparently, disclosing how well-founded the conclusions are and/or whether there are alternative conclusions, the HTA-agencies should not avoid taking the ethical analysis as close as possible to a definite conclusion. </p>","PeriodicalId":89142,"journal":{"name":"GMS health technology assessment","volume":"10 ","pages":"Doc05"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/77/38/HTA-10-05.PMC4260058.pdf","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"GMS health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3205/hta000121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2014/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

An essential component of health technology assessment (HTA) is the assessment of ethical aspects. In some healthcare contexts, tasks are strictly relegated to different expert groups: the HTA-agencies are limited to assessment of the technology and other actors within the health care sector are responsible for appraisal and recommendations. Ethical aspects of health technologies are considered with reference to values or norms in such a way that may be prescriptive, or offer guidance as to how to act or relate to the issue in question. Given this internal prescriptivity, the distinction between assessment and appraisal seems difficult to uphold, unless the scrutiny stops short of a full ethical analysis of the technology. In the present article we analyse the distinction between assessment and appraisal, using as an example ethical aspects of implementation of GPS-bracelets for people with dementia. It is concluded that for HTA-agencies with a strictly delineated assessment role, the question of how to deal with the internal prescriptivity of ethics may be confusing. A full ethical analysis might result in a definite conclusion as to whether the technology in question is ethically acceptable or not, thereby limiting choices for decision-makers, who are required to uphold certain ethical values and norms. At the same time, depending on the exact nature of such a conclusion, different action strategies can be supported. A positive appraisal within HTA could result in a decision on mandatory implementation, or funding of the technology, thereby making it available to patients, or decisions to allow and even encourage the use of the technology (even if someone else will have to fund it). A neutral appraisal, giving no definite answer as to whether implementation is recommended or not, could result in a laissez-faire attitude towards the technology. A negative appraisal could result in a decision to discourage or even prohibit implementation. This paper presents an overview of the implications of different outcomes of the ethical analysis on appraisal of the technology. It is considered important to uphold the distinction between assessment and appraisal, primarily to avoid the influence of preconceived values and political interests on the assessment. Hence, as long as it is not based on the subjective value judgments of the HTA-agency (or its representative), such an appraising conclusion would not seem to conflict with the rationale for the separation of these tasks. Moreover, it should be noted that if HTA agencies abstain from including full ethical analyses because of the risk of issuing an appraisal, they may fail to provide the best possible basis for decision-makers. Hence, we argue that as long as the ethical analysis and its conclusions are presented transparently, disclosing how well-founded the conclusions are and/or whether there are alternative conclusions, the HTA-agencies should not avoid taking the ethical analysis as close as possible to a definite conclusion.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
评价与评价卫生技术评价的伦理方面:两者的区别是否能够维持?
卫生技术评估(HTA)的一个重要组成部分是对伦理方面的评估。在某些卫生保健情况下,任务被严格分配给不同的专家组:卫生保健协会机构仅限于评估技术,卫生保健部门的其他行为者负责评估和提出建议。卫生技术的伦理方面是参照价值观或规范来考虑的,这种方式可能是规定性的,或为如何采取行动或与有关问题有关提供指导。考虑到这种内部规范,评估和评估之间的区别似乎很难坚持,除非审查在对技术进行全面的道德分析之前停止。在本文中,我们分析了评估和评估之间的区别,使用作为一个例子,为痴呆症患者实施gps手镯的伦理方面。结论是,对于具有严格界定的评估作用的卫生行政机构来说,如何处理道德规范的内部规定的问题可能令人困惑。全面的伦理分析可能会得出有关技术在伦理上是否可接受的明确结论,从而限制决策者的选择,他们需要坚持某些伦理价值观和规范。同时,根据这种结论的确切性质,可以支持不同的行动战略。HTA内部的积极评估可能会导致强制性实施的决定,或者为技术提供资金,从而使患者能够使用该技术,或者决定允许甚至鼓励使用该技术(即使必须由其他人资助)。一个中立的评价,对于是否建议实施没有给出明确的答案,可能导致对技术的自由放任态度。负面评价可能导致不鼓励甚至禁止执行的决定。本文概述了对技术评估的伦理分析的不同结果的含义。人们认为必须坚持评估和评价之间的区别,主要是为了避免先入为主的价值观和政治利益对评估的影响。因此,只要不是基于卫生事务管理局机构(或其代表)的主观价值判断,这种评价结论似乎不会与分离这些任务的理由相冲突。此外,应该指出的是,如果HTA机构因为发布评估的风险而不包括完整的道德分析,他们可能无法为决策者提供最好的基础。因此,我们认为,只要伦理分析及其结论是透明的,披露结论是多么有根据和/或是否有替代结论,hta机构不应该避免使伦理分析尽可能接近明确的结论。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Variability in the prescription of drugs with uncertain effectiveness. The case of SYSADOA in the Basque Country. Q-SEA - a tool for quality assessment of ethics analyses conducted as part of health technology assessments. Effects of continuous and intermittent renal replacement therapies among adult patients with acute kidney injury. Telemedicine: The legal framework (or the lack of it) in Europe. Complex health care interventions: Characteristics relevant for ethical analysis in health technology assessment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1