Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Priority setting in health care: trends and models from Scandinavian experiences

  • Scientific Contribution
  • Published:
Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Scandinavian welfare states have public health care systems which have universal coverage and traditionally low influence of private insurance and private provision. Due to raises in costs, elaborate public control of health care, and a significant technological development in health care, priority setting came on the public agenda comparatively early in the Scandinavian countries. The development of health care priority setting has been partly homogeneous and appears to follow certain phases. This can be of broader interest as it may shed light on alternative models and strategies in health care priority setting. Some general trends have been identified: from principles to procedures, from closed to open processes, and from experts to participation. Five general approaches have been recognized: The moral principles and values based approach, the moral principles and economic assessment approach, the procedural approach, the expert based practice defining approach, and the participatory practice defining approach. There are pros and cons with all of these approaches. For the time being the fifth approach appears attractive, but its lack of true participation and the lack of clear success criteria may pose significant challenges in the future.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, G.C., R.M. Werner, and P.A. Ubel. 2004. The costs of denying scarcity. Archives of Internal Medicine 164: 593–596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Anand, G. 2003. Who gets health care? Rationing in an age of rising costs: Life support: The Big Secret in Health Care: Rationing is here; with little guidance, workers on front lines decide who gets what treatment; nurse Micheletti’s Tough Calls. The Wall Street Journal. PubMed Abstract.

  • Arvidsson, E., M. André, L. Borgquist, and P. Carlsson. 2010. Priority setting in primary health care—dilemmas and opportunities: A focus group study. BMC Family Practice 23(11): 71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloche, M.G., and P.D. Jacobson. 2000. The Supreme Court and bedside rationing. JAMA 284: 2776–2779.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Busse, R., and C. Hoffmann. 2010. Priority setting in healthcare. What can Germany learn from other countries? Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz 53(9): 882–889.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Baerøe, K. 2009. Priority-setting in healthcare: A framework for reasonable clinical judgements. Journal of Medical Ethics 35(8): 488–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calltorp, J. 1999. Priority setting in health policy in Sweden and a comparison with Norway. Health Policy 50: 1–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, P., Kärvinge, C., Broqvist, M., Eklund, K., Hallin, B., Jacobsson, C., Jacobsson Ekman, G., et al. 2007. National model for transparent vertical prioritisation in Swedish health care, Report 1. Sweden: National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care.

  • Carlsson, P. 2010. Priority setting in health care: Swedish efforts and experiences. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 38: 561–564.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Committee on Choices in Health Care. 1992. Choices in health care. In ed. Ministry of Welfare HCA. Rijswijk.

  • Daniels, N., and J. Sabin. 2002. Setting limits fairly: Can we learn to share medical resources? 43–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Daniels, N. 2000. Accountability for reasonableness. BMJ 321: 1300–1301.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ekerstad, N., R. Löfmark, and P. Carlsson. 2010. Elderly people with multi-morbidity and acute coronary syndrome: Doctors’ views on decision-making. Scand Journal of Public Health 38: 325–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feiring, E. 2004. Rettferdig rasjonering av sykehusbehandling. Om den norske modellen for prioritering mellom pasienter med behov for spesialisert helsehjelp. Thesis. Oslo: Institute for the social sciences, University of Oslo.

  • Fleck, L.M. 1994. Just caring: Health reform and health care rationing. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 19: 435–443.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fleck, L.M. 2002. Rationing: Don’t give up. Hastings Center Report 32: 35–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, C. 1997. Priority setting in health care: Learning from international experience. Health Policy 42: 49–66.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ham, C. 1995. What can we learn from international experience? In Rationing health care, ed. Edinburgh M.R. London: Churchill Livingstone.

  • Health Care and Medical Priorities Commission. 1993. No easy choices: The difficult priorities of healthcare. Stockholm: Ministry of Health and Social Affairs.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, B. 2005. On value-judgements and ethics in health technology assessment. Poiesis & Praxis: International Journal of Technology Assessment and Ethics of Science 3(4):277–295.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm, S. 2000. Developments in the Nordic countries: Goodbye to the simple solutions. In The global challenge of health care rationing, ed. A. Coulter, and C. Ham, 29–37. London: Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holm, S. 1998. Goodbye to simple solutions: The second phase of priority setting in health care. BMJ 317: 1000–1002.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Honingsbaum, F., Calltorp, J, Ham, C., Holmström, S. 1995. Priority setting processes for healthcare in Oregon, USA; New Zealand; the Netherlands; Sweden; and the United Kingdom. Oxford: Radcliffe Medical Press.

  • Hunter, D.J. 1997. Desperately seeking solutions: Rationing health care. London: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, L., T. Marmor, and J. Oberlander. 1999. Report from the field. The Oregon health plan and the political paradox of rationing: What advocates and critics have claimed and what Oregon did. Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law 24(1): 161–180.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kenny, N., and C. Joffres. 2008. An ethical analysis of international health priority-setting. Health Care Analysis 16(2): 145–160.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McKee, M., and J. Figueras. 1996. Setting priorities, can Britain learn from Sweden? BMJ 312: 691–694.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • National Board of Health and Welfare. 2008. The National Board of Health and Welfare’s Guidelines for the Care of Heart Disease, www.socialstyrelsen.se. Accessed June 2010) [in Swedish].

  • Norges Offentlige Utredninger (NOU). 1997. Prioritering på ny: gjennomgang av retningslinjer for prioriteringer innen norsk helsetjeneste. Priority setting revisited. (In Norwegian.) Oslo: Statens forvaltningstjeneste 18.

  • Norges Offentlige Utredninger (NOU). 1987. Retningslinjer for prioritering innen den norske helsetjenesten. Guidelines for priority setting in the Norwegian healthcare system. (In Norwegian.) Oslo: Universitetsforlaget 23.

  • Norheim, O. 1993. Guidelines for priority-setting in the Norwegian health care system. In Solidarity, justice and health care priorities. Health service studies, eds. Szawarski, Z., Evans, D., vol 8 65–76. Linköping: Linköping University.

  • Norheim, O.F., O. Ekeberg, S.A. Evensen, M. Halvorsen, and K. Kvernebo. 2001. Adoption of New Health Care Services in Norway (1993–1997): Specialists’ self-assessment according to national criteria for priority setting. Health Policy 56: 65–79.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Norheim, O.F. 2003. Norway. In Reasonable rationing: International experience of priority setting in health care, ed. Ham, C., Robert, G., Philadelphia: Open University Press.

  • Pornak, S., Meyer, T., Raspe, H. 2011. The Danish debate on priority setting in medicine—Characteristics and results. Gesundheitswesen 73(10):680–687.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prioriteringscentrum. 2007. Resolving health care’s difficult choices, Report 2. Sweden: National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care.

  • Priority-setting in the health service. Copenhagen: Danish Council of Ethics, 1997. http://www.etiskraad.dk/graphics/03_udgivelser/publikationer/ENG002.HTM. Accessed 10 June 2011, http://etiskraad.dk/upload/publications-en/misc/priority-setting-in-health.htm. Accessed 21 Mar 2012.

  • Sabik, L.M., and R.K. Lie. 2008. Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries. International Journal of Equity Health 21(7): 4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, E. 2011. Prioritization, National Board of Health, Denmark, http://www.sst.dk/Nyhedscenter/Sundhedsfaglige%20kommentarer/2011/Prioritering.aspx. Accessed 15 Aug 2011.

  • Swedish Parliamentary Priorities Commission. 1995. Statens Offentliga Utredningar. 1995. Vårdens svåra val. Difficult choices in healthcare. (In Swedish) Stockholm: Socialdepartementet 5. http://www.regeringen.se/content/1/24/3515ea32.pdf Accessed 2 June 2011.

  • Waldau, S., L. Lindholm, and A.H. Wiechel. 2010. Priority setting in practice: Participants opinions on vertical and horizontal priority setting for reallocation. Health Policy 96(3): 245–254.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Waldau, S., and L. Lindholm. 2011. Some corrective notes regarding recent priority setting in Sweden. Scand Journal of Public Health 39(5): 553–554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bjørn Hofmann.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hofmann, B. Priority setting in health care: trends and models from Scandinavian experiences. Med Health Care and Philos 16, 349–356 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-012-9414-8

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-012-9414-8

Keywords

Navigation