{"title":"挪威专科医疗服务优先次序中的法律规定、经济激励和专业自主权","authors":"Afsaneh Bjorvatn, Even Nilssen","doi":"10.1007/s10728-024-00489-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>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.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legal Regulation, Financial Incentives and Professional Autonomy in the Prioritisation of Norwegian Specialist Health Services\",\"authors\":\"Afsaneh Bjorvatn, Even Nilssen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10728-024-00489-9\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>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.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-024-00489-9\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-024-00489-9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Legal Regulation, Financial Incentives and Professional Autonomy in the Prioritisation of Norwegian Specialist Health Services
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.
期刊介绍：
Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
