scholarly journals Balancing small against large burdens

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 125-142
Author(s):  
ALEX VOORHOEVE
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Resource Allocation ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Minor Ailments ◽  
Moral Enquiry ◽  
Health Burdens

AbstractCommon principles for resource allocation in health care can prioritise the alleviation of small health burdens over lifesaving treatment. I argue that there is some evidence that these principles are at odds with a sizable share of public opinion, which holds that saving a life should take priority over any number of cures for minor ailments. I propose two possible explanations for this opinion, one debunking and one vindicatory. I also outline how well-designed surveys and moral enquiry could help decide between them. Finally, I consider how priority-setting principles could be adjusted if the view that saving a life always trumps alleviating small burdens were vindicated.

scholarly journals Accountability for Reasonableness, for Priority Setting and Resource Allocation: A Case Scenario

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 23-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zoheb Rafique
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Resource Allocation ◽  
Developing Country ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Case Scenario ◽  
Scarce Resources ◽  
Accountability For Reasonableness

The purpose of this paper is to discuss the accountability for reasonableness and its four conditions. This explains the priority setting and resource allocation for scarce resources. In this article it is discussed that how the scarce resources in a developing country like Pakistan be allocated in health care. This is explained with the help of case scenario.

scholarly journals Describing practices of priority setting and resource allocation in publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brayan V. Seixas ◽  
Dean A. Regier ◽  
Stirling Bryan ◽  
Craig Mitton
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Resource Allocation ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Health Care Systems ◽  
Scientific Work ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
High Income ◽  
Publicly Funded ◽  
Care Systems

Abstract Background Healthcare spending has grown over the last decades in all developed countries. Making hard choices for investments in a rational, evidence-informed, systematic, transparent and legitimate manner constitutes an important objective. Yet, most scientific work in this area has focused on developing/improving prescriptive approaches for decision making and presenting case studies. The present work aimed to describe existing practices of priority setting and resource allocation (PSRA) within the context of publicly funded health care systems of high-income countries and inform areas for further improvement and research. Methods An online qualitative survey, developed from a theoretical framework, was administered with decision-makers and academics from 18 countries. 450 individuals were invited and 58 participated (13% of response rate). Results We found evidence that resource allocation is still largely carried out based on historical patterns and through ad hoc decisions, despite the widely held understanding that decisions should be based on multiple explicit criteria. Health technology assessment (HTA) was the tool most commonly indicated by respondents as a formal priority setting strategy. Several approaches were reported to have been used, with special emphasis on Program Budgeting and Marginal Analysis (PBMA), but limited evidence exists on their evaluation and routine use. Disinvestment frameworks are still very rare. There is increasing convergence on the use of multiple types of evidence to judge the value of investment options. Conclusions Efforts to establish formal and explicit processes and rationales for decision-making in priority setting and resource allocation have been still rare outside the HTA realm. Our work indicates the need of development/improvement of decision-making frameworks in PSRA that: 1) have well-defined steps; 2) are based on multiple criteria; 3) are capable of assessing the opportunity costs involved; 4) focus on achieving higher value and not just on adoption; 5) engage involved stakeholders and the general public; 6) make good use and appraisal of all evidence available; and 6) emphasize transparency, legitimacy, and fairness.

scholarly journals Public Opinion on Health Care and Public Health

2021 ◽  
pp. 101460
Author(s):  
Philipp Trein ◽  
Michel Fuino ◽  
Joël Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Public Opinion

scholarly journals Optimizing Scarce Resource Allocation During COVID-19: Rapid Creation of a Regional Health-Care Coalition and Triage Teams in San Diego County, California

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Asha Devereaux ◽  
Holly Yang ◽  
Gilbert Seda ◽  
Viji Sankar ◽  
Ryan C. Maves ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Resource Allocation ◽  
San Diego ◽  
Scarce Resource ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
Regional Health ◽  
Incident Command ◽  
Regional Health Care ◽  
Crisis Care

ABSTRACT Successful management of an event where health-care needs exceed regional health-care capacity requires coordinated strategies for scarce resource allocation. Publications for rapid development, training, and coordination of regional hospital triage teams to manage the allocation of scarce resources during coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are lacking. Over a period of 3 weeks, over 100 clinicians, ethicists, leaders, and public health authorities convened virtually to achieve consensus on how best to save the most lives possible and share resources. This is referred to as population-based crisis management. The rapid regionalization of 22 acute care hospitals across 4500 square miles in the midst of a pandemic with a shifting regulatory landscape was challenging, but overcome by mutual trust, transparency, and confidence in the public health authority. Because many cities are facing COVID-19 surges, we share a process for successful rapid formation of health-care care coalitions, Crisis Standard of Care, and training of Triage Teams. Incorporation of continuous process improvement and methods for communication is essential for successful implementation. Use of our regional health-care coalition communications, incident command system, and the crisis care committee helped mitigate crisis care in the San Diego and Imperial County region as COVID-19 cases surged and scarce resource collaborative decisions were required.

Public participation in health care priority setting: A scoping review

Health Policy ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 91 (3) ◽  
pp. 219-228 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig Mitton ◽  
Neale Smith ◽  
Stuart Peacock ◽  
Brian Evoy ◽  
Julia Abelson
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Participation ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Priority Setting ◽  
Health Care Priority Setting

Has Anyone Seen It?

2012 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dagmar Radin ◽  
Aleksandar Džakula
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Public Opinion ◽  
Parliamentary Elections ◽  
Political Actors ◽  
The Public ◽  
Public Sentiment ◽  
Public Opinion Surveys ◽  
Health Care Performance ◽  
Policy Arena ◽  
Care Performance

Over the past decade, public opinion surveys have shown that Croats are deeply dissatisfied with their health care system and asses it to be one of the most important issues. However, health care hardly makes it into any political discourse in Croatia. This study analyzes the results of a public opinion survey conducted before the 2007 parliamentary elections to find out what the public sentiment on health care performance in Croatia is and to analyze the reasons why health care is not addressed by political actors. Evidence suggests that while health care is the most salient issue today, the public often understands it poorly. Thus, in a political environment of competing issues, and given the complexity of tacking health care in the policy arena, politicians strategically avoid discussing the issue.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document