The cost‐effectiveness of preference‐based treatment allocation: the case of hysterectomy versus endometrial resection in the treatment of menorrhagia
研究了在卫生经济评估中，根据患者偏好分配治疗（如子宫切除术与子宫内膜切除术治疗月经过多）是否比统一采用最成本效果方案更优。
Typically, economic evaluation compares the costs and benefits of two or more interventions and seeks to identify the single superior option on the basis of relative cost-effectiveness. It is then anticipated that all patients will receive the more or most cost-effective option. This ‘all or nothing’ approach can be departed from when sub-groups of patient exist, defined on the basis of clinical or demographic characteristics which are considered to influence benefit, for whom an option is cost-effective whilst not being so for the population of patients as a whole. However, patients' preferences concerning the different process characteristics and outcomes of an intervention will also influence the benefit they derive from health care. This paper explores the concept of preference-based sub-group analysis in economic evaluation to assess the potential cost-effectiveness of using patients' preferences to determine treatment allocation. The clinical example used to explore these methods is the comparison of abdominal hysterectomy (AH) and transcervical resection of the endometrial (TCRE) for the treatment of menorrhagia. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.