Prioritisation in healthcare—still muddling through
Would it not be wonderful, if we could always provide everybody with all the medical interventions they might require or fancy? Not in this world—neither in developing nor in developed nations. We are witnessing speedily mounting costs of emerging medical technologies and novel drugs. At the same time changing demographics imply that more and more elderly with a plethora of chronic diseases will have to be taken care of. However, resources for health care are not boundless. As national budgets are limited, channelling more money to health care wears away resources from other portfolios essential for health (e.g. schooling, education, housing and infrastructure), which at a certain stage starts having negative effects on public health.
We have seen unequalled advances in health sciences and medical technologies over the last decades, triggering equally unparalleled demands for new medical services, effective preventive measures, successful therapies and higher overall quality. In their n
- Kenny, N., and C. Joffres. 2008. An ethical analysis of international health priority-setting. Health Care Analysis 16(2): 145–160. CrossRef
- Sabik, L.M., and R.K. Lie. 2008. Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the Experiences of Eight Countries. International Journal for Equity in Health 7(1): 4. doi:10.1186/1475-9276-7-4. CrossRef
- Welch, H.G., L.M. Schwartz, and S. Woloshin. 2011. Overdiagnosed: Making People Sick in the Pursuit of Health. Boston: Beacon Press.
- Wilmot, S. 2011. Evidence, ethics and inclusion: A broader base for NICE. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy 14(2) this issue.
- Prioritisation in healthcare—still muddling through
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy
Volume 14, Issue 2 , pp 109-110
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer Netherlands
- Additional Links
- Industry Sectors