Health Care Analysis最新文献

Priority setting of scarce resources in healthcare is high on the agenda of most healthcare systems implying a need to develop robust foundations for making fair allocation decisions. One central factor for such decisions in needs-based systems, following both empirical studies and theoretical analyses, is severity. However, it has been noted that severity is an under-theorized concept. One such aspect is how severity should relate to temporality. There is a rich discussion on temporality and distributive justice, however, this discussion needs to be adapted to the practical and ethical requirements of healthcare priority setting principles at mid-level. In this article, we analyze how temporal aspects should be taken into account when assessing severity as a modifier for cost-effectiveness. We argue that when assessing the severity of a condition, we have reason to look at complete conditions from a time-neutral perspective, meaning that we take the full affectable stretch of the condition into account without modifying severity as patients move through the temporal stretch and without discounting the future. We do not find support for taking the 'shape' of a condition into account per se, e.g. whether the severity has a declining or inclining curve, or that severity is intermittent rather than continuous. In order to take severity seriously, we argue that we have reason to apply a quantified approach where every difference in severity should impact on priority setting. In conclusion, we find that this approach is practically useful in actual priority setting.

Community-based interventions (CBIs) show promise as effective and cost-effective obesity prevention initiatives. CBIs are typically complex interventions, including multiple settings, strategies and stakeholders. Cost-effectiveness evidence, however, generally only considers a narrow range of costs and benefits associated with anthropometric outcomes. While it is recognised that the complexity of CBIs may result in broader non-health societal and community benefits, the identification, measurement, and quantification of these outcomes is limited. This study aimed to understand the perspectives of stakeholders on the broader benefits of CBIs and their measurement, as well as perceptions of CBI cost-effectiveness. Purposive sampling was used to recruit participants from three stakeholder groups (lead researchers, funders, and community stakeholders of CBIs). Online semi-structured interviews were conducted, taking a constructivist approach. Coding, theme development and analysis were based on published guidance for thematic analysis. Twenty-six stakeholders participated in the interviews (12 lead researchers; 7 funders; 6 community stakeholders). Six key themes emerged; (1) Impacts of CBIs (health impacts and broader impacts); (2) Broader benefits were important to stakeholders; (3) Measurement of benefits are challenging; (4) CBIs were considered cost-effective; (5) Framing CBIs for community engagement (6) Making equitable impacts and sustaining changes-successes and challenges. Across all stakeholders, broader benefits, particularly the establishment of networks and partnerships within communities, were seen as important outcomes of CBIs. Participants viewed the CBI approach to obesity prevention as cost-effective, however, there were challenges in measuring, quantifying and valuing broader benefits. Development of tools to measure and quantify broader benefits would allow for more comprehensive evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of CBIs for obesity prevention.

The rise in the number of people on sick leave for common mental disorders is a growing concern, both from a societal and individual perspective. One common suggestion to improve the return-to-work process is increased cooperation between the relevant parties, including at least the employer, the social insurance agency and health care. This suggestion is often made on the presumption that all parties share the common goal of reintegrating the patient-employee back into the workplace. In this paper we investigate this presumption by mapping out the ethical frameworks of these three key actors in any return-to-work process. We show that although the goals of these actors often, and to a large extent, overlap there are potential differences and tensions between their respective goals. Further, we emphasise that there may be other limitations to an actor’s participation in the process. In particular the health care system is required to respect patient autonomy and confidentiality. There is also an inherent tension in the dual roles of health care professionals as therapists and expert witnesses in work ability assessment. In conclusion, there are potential tensions between the key actors in the return-to-work process. These tensions need to be addressed in order to enable an increased cooperation between actors and to facilitate the development of a feasible plan of action for all parties, including the employee.

To study hospital physicians’ awareness and perceptions of the legal and financial regulations, and their impact on professional discretion regarding equity in access to treatment and quality of care. A sample of 637 physicians in the Norwegian specialist healthcare services selected from a survey conducted by the Institute for Studies of the Medical Profession. The paper investigates how legal and financial policy instruments affect the application of professional discretion regarding the prioritisation of specialist health services. Descriptive statistics and regressions were conducted for the analyses. Compared with financial incentives, legal regulations (laws, priority rules and guidelines) were assessed to be less negative external interventions in the exercise of medical and professional judgement. The empirical analyses revealed a positive tendency in physicians’ assessments of the impact of legal regulations on treatment equity and healthcare quality, but negative attitudes towards financial instruments. The variations revealed are attributable to various structural and epistemic features of the legal–bureaucratic and economic models of administration in this area of the welfare state. Legal and financial regulations are imposed to achieve certain social goals and values. The findings of this study can provide further insight for the health authorities in other countries concerning implementation of such regulations in the specialist healthcare services.

This study examined variation in medical practitioners' practice-based conceptions of what it means to be a doctor, based on interviews with 30 clinicians who were also medical educators. Participants included general practitioners, surgeons and physicians (non-surgical specialists). Participants were asked to draw a concept map of 'being a doctor', followed by semi-structured interviews using a phenomenographic research design. Three conceptions were identified, varyingly focused on (1) treating patients' medical problems; (2) maximising patients' well-being; and (3) maximising community health. Each conception was distinguished by variation in awareness of six underlying dimensions of being a doctor: (1) doctors' actions; (2) treatment success; (3) patients' actions; (4) patients' well-being; (5) community needs; and (6) social justice. Whilst all participants included dimensions 1 and 2 in their described practice, numerous participants did not include dimensions 3 and 4, i.e. did not take the patients' role and the impact of patients' psychosocial context into account in their practice. This is concerning, especially amongst medical educators, given the widely acknowledged importance of patient-centred care in medical practice. Similarly, only some of the participants considered community health needs and felt a broader social responsibility beyond their responsibility to individual patients. These findings highlight aspects of the medical profession that need to be further emphasised in medical training and continuing professional development.

Providers are essential to the delivery of abortion care. Yet, they often occupy an ambiguous space in political discourse around abortion. The introduction of a new abortion service in Ireland invites us to look afresh at providers. Since the Health (Regulation of Termination of Pregnancy) Act 2018 came into force, by far the most common form of abortion care has been early medical abortion (EMA). This is typically provided by General Practitioners (GPs), with approximately 10% of GPs having chosen to provide EMA. This article draws on an empirical study of providers to investigate their motivations for, and experiences of, provision and their views on colleagues who have not chosen to provide. The study shows that for many providers, the choice to provide was grounded in a moral commitment to protecting women's rights to autonomy and health and ensuring that the harms of the past were not repeated. The article argues that notwithstanding increased normalisation of EMA in Ireland, conscience still has a role to play in abortion care provision and it is important to reflect on the various aspects of this role.

Evidence shows that during birth women frequently experience unconsented care, coercion, and a loss of autonomy. For many countries, this contradicts both the law and medical ethics guidelines, which emphasize that competent and fully informed women's autonomy must always be respected. To better understand this discordance, we empirically describe perinatal maternity care providers' and women's moral deliberation surrounding coercive measures during birth. Data were obtained from 1-on-1 interviews with providers (N = 15) and women (N = 14), and a survey of women (N = 118). Analyses focused on an in-depth exploration of responses to a question on the permissibility of coercion in birth whose wording was borrowed from a Swiss medical-ethical guideline. Reasons for and against a principle permissibility of coercive measures in birth were grouped into clusters of reasons to build a coherent explanatory framework. Factors considered morally relevant when deliberating on coercion included women's decisional capacity, beneficence/non-maleficence, authority through knowledge on the part of providers, flaws of the medical system, or the imperative to protect the most vulnerable. Also, we identified various misconceptions, such as the conviction that a pathological birth can justify coercion or that fetal rights can justifiably infringe on women's autonomy. Information and education on the issue of coercion in birth are urgently needed to enable women to fully exercise their reproductive autonomy, to prevent long-term adverse health outcomes of women and children, and to reconcile the medical vigilance which has lead to a reduction of perinatal morbidity and mortality with women's enfranchisement in their own care.

Developing an instrument with the capability approach can be challenging, since the capability concept of Sen is ambiguous concerning the burdens that people experience whilst achieving their capabilities. A solution is to develop instruments with a comprehensive concept of capability, such as the concept of 'option-freedom'. This study aims to develop a theoretical framework for instrument development with the concept of option-freedom. A best-fit framework synthesis was conducted with seven qualitative papers by one researcher. Two researchers supported the synthesis by discussing interim results during the synthesis. A priori concepts of option-freedom were used to deductively code against. Themes and subthemes were developed inductively when data did not match a priori themes. Seven paper were identified that fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Four themes emerged from the synthesis. (1) Option Wellbeing represents a range of options that need to be satisfied for individuals to experience wellbeing. (2) Self-Realization represents that there are experiences in an individual's life that have value beyond realizing options. (3) Perceived Access to Options represents the perceived ability of individuals to realize freedoms. (4) Perceived Control represents the experience of having control. Developing an instrument with the proposed framework has two benefits. First, it acknowledges the importance of assessing impediments in realizing capabilities for wellbeing assessment. Secondly, the themes form a broad informational base by including themes related to subjective wellbeing. Future research should study the feasibility of implementing the framework for instrument development.

Health technologies such as apps for digital contract tracing [DCT] played a crucial role in containing and combating infections during the COVID-19 pandemic. Their primary function was to prevent the spread of SARS-CoV-2 by consistently generating and disseminating information related to various events such as encounters, vaccinations or infections. While the functionality of DCT has been well researched, the necessity of transparency in the use of DCT and the consent to share sensitive information such as users' health, vaccination and location status remains unclear. On one hand, DCT enabled the continuous monitoring of various risk factors, including data-based calculations of infection probabilities. On the other hand, digital monitoring of health risks was closely associated with various uncertainties, such as the ambiguous storage of personal data and its potential future misuse, e.g., by tech companies or health authorities. Our contribution aims to retrospectively analyze the COVID-19 pandemic from a post-pandemic perspective and utilize it as a case study for the implementation of new technological measures. We argue that under the condition of voluntary use of DCT, transparency plays a key role in convincing individuals to install health technologies on their mobile devices, keep them activated and consent to the sharing of sensitive data. We support our argument with qualitative data from an expert survey conducted between 2020 and 2021 and analyzed according to the principles of Grounded Theory.

The inherent normativity of HTA can be conceptualized as a result of normative commitments, a concept that we further specify to encompass moral, epistemological and ontological commitments at play in the practice of HTA. Based on examples from literature, and an analysis of the example of assessing Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing (NIPT), we will show that inevitable normative decisions in conducting an assessment commits the HTA practitioner to moral (regarding what makes a health technology desirable), ontological (regarding which effects of health technology are conceivable), and epistemological (regarding how to obtain reliable information about health technology) norms. This highlights and supports the need for integrating normative analysis and stakeholder participation, providing guidance to HTA practitioners when making normative choices. This will foster a shared understanding between those who conduct, use, or are impacted by assessments regarding what are conceivable and desirable outcomes of using health technology, and how to collect reliable information to assess whether these outcomes are (going to be) realized. It also provides more insight into the implications of different normative choices.