An economic perspective on evidence-based patient choice in surgery

ANZ Journal of Surgery

Volumn 73, Issue 6, 2003, Pages 427-430

  Salkeld, Glenn ^a,c   Solomon, Michael J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^c ROYAL PRINCE ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; ECONOMIC ASPECT; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PATIENT CARE; REVIEW; SURGICAL PATIENT;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; HUMANS; PATIENT PARTICIPATION; PERSONAL AUTONOMY; PHYSICIAN-PATIENT RELATIONS; QUALITY-ADJUSTED LIFE YEARS; SURGERY; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, OPERATIVE;

EID: 0041344570     PISSN: 14451433     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.t01-1-02648.x     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Salkeld G, Mitchell A, Hill S. Pharmaceuticals. In: Mooney G, Scotton R (eds). Economics and Australian Health Policy. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1999; pp. 115-36.
2. Parker M. The ethics of evidence-based patient choice. Health Expectations 2001; 4: 87-91.
3. Sculpher M, Gafni A, Watt I. Shared treatment decision making in a collectively funded health care system: possible conflicts and some potential solutions. Social Sci. Med. 2002; 54: 1369-77.
4. Australian Bureau of Statistics. Census 2001. Canberra, 2002.
5. Edwards A, Elwyn G, Mulley A. Explaining risks: turning numerical data into meaningful pictures. BMJ 2002; 324: 827-30.
6. Charles G, Gafni A, Whelan T. Shared decision making in the medical encounter: What does it mean? (or it takes at least two to tango). Social Sci. Med. 1997; 44: 681-92.
7. O'Connor A, Rostom A, Fiest V, Tetroe J, Entwistle V. Decision aids for patients facing health treatment or screening decisions: Systematic review. BMJ 1999; 319: 731-4.
8. Ryan M, San Miguel F. Revisiting the axiom of completeness in health care. Health Economics 2003; 12: 295-307.
9. Solomon M, Pager CK, Keshava A et al. What do patients want? Patient preferences and surrogate decision making in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Dis. Colon Rectum, in press.
10. Coates A, Simes JR. Patient assessment of adjuvant treatment in operable breast cancer. In: Williams CJ (ed). Introducing New Treatments for Cancer: Practical Ethical and Legal Problems. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1992.
11. Drummond MF, O'Brien B, Stoddart GL, Torrance GW. Methods for the Economic Evaluation of Health Care Programs. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.
12. Meltzer MI. Introduction to health economics for physicians. Lancet 2001; 358: 993-8.
13. Brazier JE, Johnson AG. Economics of surgery. Lancet 2001; 358: 1077-81.
14. Carter R., Hailey D. Economic evaluation of the cochlear implant. Int. J. Technol. Assessment Health Care 1999; 15: 520-30.
15. Campbell HE, Tait S, Buxton MJ et al. AUK trial-based cost utility analysis of transmyocardial laser revascularization compared to conventional medical therapy for treatment of refractory angina pectoris. Eur. J. Cardio Thorac. Surg. 2001; 20: 312-18.
16. George B, Harris A, Mitchell A. Cost-effectiveness analysis and the consistency of decision making: evidence from pharmaceutical reimbursement in Australia (1991-96). Pharmacoeconomics 2001; 19: 1103-9.
17. Hunt JA, Solomon M. Screening for cancer: the science behind the rhetoric. Int. J. Surg. Sci. 2001; 2: 161-7.
18. Salkeld G, Young GP, Irwig L, Haas M, Glasziou P. Cost-effectiveness analysis of screening by faecal occult blood testing for colorectal cancer in Australia. Aust. NZ J. Public Health 1996; 20: 138-43.