Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hello. i have seen it mentioned all over the place. What is NICE? i don't mean what does it stand for particularly but more what it is, what it does etc....

    Thanks
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Wikipedia is your friend.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    National Institute for Health and Clincal Excellence
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It is an institute that reviews whether particular treatments/drugs should be considered worthwhile by the NHS - they screen all treatments before release to the NHS.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence releases clinical appraisals regarding the NHS and the potential treatment given to patients. They consider the benefit the treatment has to a patient, how long it lasts for - and more significantly, its cost-effectiveness.

    You can find so much more about NICE here.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    !MEna hits the nail there, what NICE do which no-one else does is cost-effectiveness studies, using tools such as the notorious/revolutionary/crucial Quality Added Life Years. Independent of the drug companies, health commissioning trusts and anyone else who buys or sells healthcare (Or believes they deserve an opinion on it for reasons beyond fathom, I'm looking at you Paul Dacre). Makes them really unpopular. But very important.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    From what I understand, NICE basically acts as a screen which assesses the various drugs on offer and approves what it deems to be the most clinical- and cost-effective ones for NHS use.

    But, as shown by all the links already posted, a little research goes a long way.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It has really all been said before... but you should really learn as much as you can about NICE; interviewers love when you mention it. It can apply to so many topics; you can easily relate it to current affairs, or to more basic schemes like PBR and PBC.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Once you get to med school stuff like NICE goes out the window (you just give the drugs your told to give). But, its one of those irritating little hurdles you should learn about for the interview.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I would agree and disagree with you airtones. I mean, you are restricted in your prescribing by your grade, your knowledge and the practices of your trust. But it is essential to know that these things aren't random and the things you feel confident with aren't an accident, they were designed by someone for a reason. Trust guidelines don't just call themselves into existence, they're some of the most contentious documents in the country.

    I agree with you entirely in terms of student/junior doctor day to day experience, no-one thinks about the broader political implications of their choices every single time. But its still blasted important to know about and consider.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    NICE was originally the national institute of clinical excellence and is now the national institute for health and clinical excellence. it was originally set up to aid clinical governance (a term you should be able to define when discussing) which means it aimed to guide what treatments were the most effective and be the marker for best practice, this also meant deciding on the cost benefit of treatments. for example is treatment a is effective in 90/100 cases and cost 10p and treatment b is effective in 99/100 cases and cost £60, nice would obviously reccomend treatment A. this is when it gets complicated because NICE had to start doing these cost/benefit analysis which when the drug could save a life is effectively worthless. this has really bogged down nice as it was never meant to be doing this and consequently gets taken to court and often forced to reverse its decision. as it appears it is the public's NHS and the public demands it gets whatever it wants regardless of the cost or evidence of effectivness. see the cases regarding herceptin and the kidney cancer drug. nice guidance is also some of the most stringent and objective in the world, as such it takes a long time to come out and is copied by many other countries.

    for example, cox 2 inhibitors are a notoriously contentious drug. seach for cox 2 and get

    http://www.nice.org.uk/search/search...searchType=all read it and make an informed decision. thats the idea.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    New Labour, initiative which lacks power.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    i think the idea was a great one. its implementation towards forcing decisions rather than providing guidance is where the problems arose.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    NICE gets a lot of flak for doing on a national scale what virtually every health care trust used to do on an individual basis. Its still vastly better than the earlier alternative.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arcoxia)
    Wikipedia is your friend.
    Wow, someone just negged me for this, claiming 'you have no freinds'. Yes they did spell friends wrong.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by davey jones)
    i think the idea was a great one. its implementation towards forcing decisions rather than providing guidance is where the problems arose.
    I think the opposite is true, and that's where the problem lies.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Toiletpaper8)
    I think the opposite is true, and that's where the problem lies.
    You mean that you'd prefer decisions rather than guidance?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    You mean that you'd prefer decisions rather than guidance?
    From what I gathered anyway, guidance creates inequality of treatment by different PCTs whereas decisions, fair or unfair would still maintain a "national" health service.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    well i can see that point, but inversely the epidemiology of an area's health differs geographically/socioeconomically. but if the body that compiles evidence and reccomendations for best practice gets bogged down in forcing decisions based on available funds rather than the real benefits of treatment then a conflict of interest occurs. the point of nice was an objective body of evidence. plus it renders the whole thing pointless when the public just challenge it in court and it comes down to the trusts not being able to afford it.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    In my darker moments, I think the public should just shut up and take what they're told.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.