Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/11328/2011 |
Resumo: | Activity was undertaken to develop a Prioritization Scoring Index for Portugal and Bulgaria that weights the importance given to ethical rationing principles that should guide decisions at the bedside. Data from two random samples of 355 Portuguese and 298 Bulgarian members of the public were collected from an online questionnaire. Questions asked about the level of importance given to specific issues related to patient's prioritization criteria. Responses were analyzed quantitatively with the SPSS. In the process of selecting the patient to treat, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents seem unanimous in giving greater importance to (i) the treatment outcomes, (ii) the severity of illness, (iii) children, and (iv) patients' fragility. In general, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents allocate more than 50% of the prioritization weight to equity considerations, approximately 35% to efficiency considerations, and 5% to lottery selection. Even so, Bulgarian respondents rate highly the equity and less the efficiency consideration than Portuguese respondents. Although the pursuit of efficiency seems to be valued by respondents, their major concern seems to be with the reduction of inequalities in health. |
id |
RCAP_b0b7beced4b3ab8a15a43940ad1af40e |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.uportu.pt:11328/2011 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian SurveyBulgariaEfficiencyEquityPortugalPrioritizationSocial valuesActivity was undertaken to develop a Prioritization Scoring Index for Portugal and Bulgaria that weights the importance given to ethical rationing principles that should guide decisions at the bedside. Data from two random samples of 355 Portuguese and 298 Bulgarian members of the public were collected from an online questionnaire. Questions asked about the level of importance given to specific issues related to patient's prioritization criteria. Responses were analyzed quantitatively with the SPSS. In the process of selecting the patient to treat, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents seem unanimous in giving greater importance to (i) the treatment outcomes, (ii) the severity of illness, (iii) children, and (iv) patients' fragility. In general, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents allocate more than 50% of the prioritization weight to equity considerations, approximately 35% to efficiency considerations, and 5% to lottery selection. Even so, Bulgarian respondents rate highly the equity and less the efficiency consideration than Portuguese respondents. Although the pursuit of efficiency seems to be valued by respondents, their major concern seems to be with the reduction of inequalities in health.2017-12-13T16:24:25Z2017-01-01T00:00:00Z2017info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11328/2011engPinho, MicaelaBorges, Ana Pintoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-06-15T02:10:14ZPortal AgregadorONG |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
title |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
spellingShingle |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey Pinho, Micaela Bulgaria Efficiency Equity Portugal Prioritization Social values |
title_short |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
title_full |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
title_fullStr |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
title_full_unstemmed |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
title_sort |
Relative Importance Assigned to Health Care Rationing Principles at the Bedside: Evidence from a Portuguese and Bulgarian Survey |
author |
Pinho, Micaela |
author_facet |
Pinho, Micaela Borges, Ana Pinto |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Borges, Ana Pinto |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Pinho, Micaela Borges, Ana Pinto |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Bulgaria Efficiency Equity Portugal Prioritization Social values |
topic |
Bulgaria Efficiency Equity Portugal Prioritization Social values |
description |
Activity was undertaken to develop a Prioritization Scoring Index for Portugal and Bulgaria that weights the importance given to ethical rationing principles that should guide decisions at the bedside. Data from two random samples of 355 Portuguese and 298 Bulgarian members of the public were collected from an online questionnaire. Questions asked about the level of importance given to specific issues related to patient's prioritization criteria. Responses were analyzed quantitatively with the SPSS. In the process of selecting the patient to treat, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents seem unanimous in giving greater importance to (i) the treatment outcomes, (ii) the severity of illness, (iii) children, and (iv) patients' fragility. In general, Portuguese and Bulgarian respondents allocate more than 50% of the prioritization weight to equity considerations, approximately 35% to efficiency considerations, and 5% to lottery selection. Even so, Bulgarian respondents rate highly the equity and less the efficiency consideration than Portuguese respondents. Although the pursuit of efficiency seems to be valued by respondents, their major concern seems to be with the reduction of inequalities in health. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-12-13T16:24:25Z 2017-01-01T00:00:00Z 2017 |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/11328/2011 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/11328/2011 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
|
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1777302551372234752 |