PDF herunterladen
Gesundheitsökonomie & Qualitätsmanagement 2017; 22(03): 131-134
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-108015
Forum
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Klinische Ökonomik – Was sie ist, was sie will und weshalb wir sie brauchen

Franz Porzsolt
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
05. Juli 2017 (online)

Auch verfügbar auf
    Lizenzen und Reprints

Die klinische Ökonomik lässt sich einordnen zwischen den Kernfächern der Medizin und der Epidemiologie, der Ethik, den Wirtschaftswissenschaften und der Jurisprudenz. Durch die klinische Ökonomik wird eine Reihe bisher unbeachteter ethischer Konflikte aufgedeckt, von deren Lösung letztlich die Autonomie des Fachs Medizin abhängen wird.

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Sackett DL, Richardson WS, Rosenberg W. et al. Evidence-based Medicine. First Edition. New York: Churchill Livingstone; 1997
    Google Scholar
  • 2 Porzsolt F. Klinische Ökonomik: Die ökonomische Bewertung von Gesundheitsleistungen aus der Sicht des Patienten. In: Porzsolt F, Williams AR, Kaplan RM. (eds) Klinische Ökonomik. Effektivität und Effizienz von Gesundheitsleistungen. Ecomed Verlagsgesellschaft; 2003: 17-40
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Porzsolt F, Kaplan RM. „CLINECS“: Strategy and Tactics to provide Evidence of the Usefulness of Health Care Services from the Patient’s Perspective (Value for Patients). In: Porzsolt F, Kaplan RM. (eds.) Optimizing Health – Improving the Value of Healthcare Delivery. New York: Springer; 2006. pp 1–9
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Porzsolt F. Die wesentlichen Unterschiede zwischen Klinischer Ökonomik und Gesundheitsökonomie. In: Porzsolt F. (Hrsg.) Grundlagen der Klinischen Ökonomik. Schriftenreihe PVS Verband Band 11, 1.Auflage. Berlin: 2011: 17-21
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Porzsolt F, Braubach P, Flurschütz PI. et al. Medical Students Help Avoid the Expert Bias in Medicine. Creative Education 2012; 03: 1115-1121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Porzsolt F, Bonotto de O, Costa IC, Thomaz TG. for the SHUFFLE group Advantages and Limitations of Twin Assessment of Clinical Trials (TACT). J Publ Health 2009; 17: 425-435
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Rosati P, Porzsolt F. A practical educational tool for teaching child-care hospital professionals attending evidence-based practice courses for con-tinuing medical education to appraise internal validity in systematic re-views. J Eval Clin Pract 2013; 4: 648-652
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Rosati P, Porzsolt F, Ricciotti G. et al. Major discrepancies between what clinical trial registries record and paediatric randomised controlled trials publish. Trials 2016; 17: 430-430
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Porzsolt F, Eisemann M, Habs M. et al. Form Follows Function: Pragmatic Controlled Trials (PCTs) have to answer different questions and require different designs than Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs). J Publ Health 2013; 21: 307-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Haynes B. Can it work? Does it work? Is it worth it?. BMJ 1999; 319: 652 B-652 B
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Roland M, Torgersen DJ. Understanding controlled trials. What are pragmatic trials?. Br Med J 1998; 316: 285-285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Porzsolt F, Rocha NG, Toledo-Arruda AC. et al. Efficacy and Effectiveness Trials Have Different Goals, Use Different Tools, and Generate Different Messages. Pragmatic and Observational Research 2015; 6: 47-54
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Ioannidis JPA. Why Most Discovered True Associations Are Inflated. Epidemiology 2008; 19: 640-648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Ioannidis JPA. Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful. PLoS Med 2016 13. e1002049
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Allison DB, Brown AW, Brandon JG. et al. A tragedy of errors. Mistakes in peer-reviewd papers are easy to find but hard to fix. Nature 2016; 530: 27-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bauer K, Schroeder M, Porzsolt F. et al. Comparison of international guidelines on the accompaning therapies for gastric cancer. Reasons for the differences. J Gastric Cancer 2015; 15: 10-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Porzsolt F. Prostatakrebs-Studie. Keine Schuldzuweisungen. Dtsch Ärztebl 2017; 114: A228-229
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Correia LC, Latado A, Porzsolt F. Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med 2016; 375: 1797-1799
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Berwick DM. Avoiding overuse—the next quality frontier. The Lancet published 08 January 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Brownlee S, Chalkidou K, Doust J. et al. Evidence for overuse of medical services around the world. The Lancet published 08 January 2017
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Porzsolt F. The Y-nurse – pain in the neck or blessing for the team. BMJ blog by BMJ group, December 29, 2010
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Porzsolt F. Clinical Economics and Nursing. Rev. Latino-Am.. Enfermagem 2015 23. Online version ISSN 1518–8345
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Porzsolt F, Müller H, François-Kettner H. et al. The risk of safety in health care. J Med Safety 2014; 8-12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Porzsolt F. Prävention aus Sicht der Klinischen Ökonomik – Eine lebensnotwendige Konsequenz der Zivilisation oder „gefühlte Sicherheit“?. In: Kirch W, Middeke M, Rychlik R. (Hrsg) Aspekte der Prävention. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2010: 46-55
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Porzsolt F, Polianski I, Görgen A. et al. Safety and security: the valences of values. Journal of Applied Security Research 2011; 6: 483-490
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Porzsolt F. Evidence-based Risk Management: safety means “perception of risk”. 4th World Congress on Clinical Safety. Vienna/Austria: Sept 28–30, 2015
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Porzsolt F. Safety means perception of risk. J Med Safety 2016; 18-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Porzsolt F. Risk Management in Health Care – Lessons learned from Clinical Economics. In: Huber M, Moormann C, Proske D. Proceedings of the 10th International Probabilistic Workshop. Stuttgart: 2012
    Google Scholar