Prioritising, Ranking and Resource Implementation - A Normative Analysis
سال انتشار: 1397
نوع سند: مقاله ژورنالی
زبان: انگلیسی
مشاهده: 199
فایل این مقاله در 10 صفحه با فرمت PDF قابل دریافت می باشد
- صدور گواهی نمایه سازی
- من نویسنده این مقاله هستم
استخراج به نرم افزارهای پژوهشی:
شناسه ملی سند علمی:
JR_HPM-7-6_007
تاریخ نمایه سازی: 18 مرداد 1403
چکیده مقاله:
Background Priority setting in publicly financed healthcare systems should be guided by ethical norms and other considerations viewed as socially valuable, and we find several different approaches for how such norms and considerations guide priorities in healthcare decision-making. Common to many of these approaches is that interventions are ranked in relation to each other, following the application of these norms and considerations, and that this ranking list is then translated into a coverage scheme. In the literature we find at least two different views on how a ranking list should be translated into coverage schemes: (۱) rationing from the bottom where everything below a certain ranking order is rationed; or (۲) a relative degree of coverage, where higher ranked interventions are given a relatively larger share of resources than lower ranked interventions according to some “curve of coverage.” Methods The aim of this article is to provide a normative analysis of how the background set of ethical norms and other considerations support these two views. Results The result of the analysis shows that rationing from the bottom generally gets stronger support if taking background ethical norms seriously, and with regard to the extent the ranking succeeds in realising these norms. However, in non-ideal rankings and to handle variations at individual patient level, there is support for relative coverage at the borderline of what could be covered. A more general relative coverage curve could also be supported if there is a need to generate resources for the healthcare system, by getting patients back into production and getting acceptance for priority setting decisions. Conclusion Hence, different types of reasons support different deviations from rationing from the bottom. And it should be noted that the two latter reasons will imply a cost in terms of not living up to the background set of ethical norms.
کلیدواژه ها:
نویسندگان
Lars Sandman
National Center for Priority Setting in Health-Care, Department of Medicine and Health, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden
مراجع و منابع این مقاله:
لیست زیر مراجع و منابع استفاده شده در این مقاله را نمایش می دهد. این مراجع به صورت کاملا ماشینی و بر اساس هوش مصنوعی استخراج شده اند و لذا ممکن است دارای اشکالاتی باشند که به مرور زمان دقت استخراج این محتوا افزایش می یابد. مراجعی که مقالات مربوط به آنها در سیویلیکا نمایه شده و پیدا شده اند، به خود مقاله لینک شده اند :