Geographic favoritism in liver transplantation - Unfortunate or unfair?

New England Journal of Medicine

Volumn 339, Issue 18, 1998, Pages 1322-1325

  Ubel, Peter A ^a   Caplan, Arthur L ^b  

^a VETERANS AFFAIRS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH PROGRAM; HLA MATCHING; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; LAW; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; ORGAN DONOR; PATIENT SELECTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC OPINION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; REVIEW; UNITED STATES;

CLINICAL APPROACH/SOURCE; FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; GEOGRAPHIC FACTORS; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE AND PUBLIC HEALTH; JUSTICE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SELECTION FOR TREATMENT; STANDARDS; TRANSPLANT RECIPIENTS; UNITED NETWORK FOR ORGAN SHARING; UNITED STATES;

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT; GOVERNMENT REGULATION; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HUMANS; LIVER DISEASES; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; PATIENT SELECTION; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0032578845     PISSN: 00284793     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1056/NEJM199810293391811     Document Type: Review

References (34)

1. Siminoff LA, Arnold RM, Caplan AL, Virnig BA, Seltzer DL. Public policy governing organ and tissue procurement in the United States: results from the National Organ and Tissue Procurement Study. Ann Intern Med 1995;123:10-7.
2. Caplan AL. Am I my brother's keeper? The ethical frontiers of biomedicine. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1998.
3. Changing the US transplant system. Lancet 1998;352:79.
4. Meckler L. Several states oppose organ-sharing policy: their laws are aimed at federal rules. Associated Press. July 15, 1998.
5. Steward A. Jersey lawmakers vow to fight changes in organ transplant rules. The Star Ledger. May 5, 1998:28.
6. Hauptman PJ, O'Connor KJ. Procurement and allocation of solid organs for transplantation. N Engl J Med 1997;336:422-31.
7. Belle SH, Beringer KC, Detre KM. An update on liver transplantation in the United States: recipient characteristics and outcome. In: Terasaki CA, ed. Clinical transplants. Los Angeles: UCLA Tissue Typing Laboratory, 1995:19-33.
8. Southard JH, Beizer FO. Organ preservation. Annu Rev Med 1995;46: 235-47.
9. Vix J, Compagnon P, Beller JP, Jaeck D, Wolf P, Boudjema K. Liver grafts can be preserved overnight. Liver Transplant Surg 1996;2(2):105-10.
10. Klassen AC, Klassen DK, Brookmeyer R, Frank RG, Marconi K. Factors influencing waiting time and successful receipt of cadaveric liver transplant in the United States, 1990 to 1992. Med Care 1998;36:281-94.
11. Packer-Tursman J. Poll: pick transplants on need, not locale. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. June 18, 1998:A5.
12. Siminoff LA, Arnold RM, Caplan AL. Asking for altruism when death occurs: who asks for organ donation and why? Transplant Proc 1996;28: 3632-8.
13. Simmons RG, Marine S, Simmons RL. Gift of life. Rev. ed. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1987.
14. Siminoff LA, Arnold RM, Caplan AL. Health care professional attitudes toward donation: effect on practice and procurement. J Trauma 1995;39:553-9.
15. Novelle AC. The Surgeon General's workshop on increasing organ donation. Bethesda, Md.: Department of Health and Human Services, 1991.
16. Steinbrook R. Allocating livers - devising a fair system. N Engl J Med 1997;336:436-8.
17. New transplant rules: life or death choices. San Francisco Chronicle. April 5, 1998:6.
18. Griffith D. Area's transplant centers see threat in federal rule change. Sacramento Bee. March 27, 1998:B1.
19. Rovner J. Discontent as US organ-transplantation waiting lists overhauled. Lancet 1998;351:1041.
20. Bryce CL, Cline KE. The supply and use of selected medical technologies. Health Aff(Millwood) 1998;17(1):213-24.
21. Wilder D. Equity, efficacy, and the point system for transplant recipient selection. Transplant Proc 1989;21:3437-9.
22. Rawls J. A theory of justice. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1971.
23. Kilner JF. Who lives? Who dies? Ethical criteria in patient selection. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1990.
24. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G. The efficacy and equity of retransplantation: an experimental survey of public attitudes. Health Policy 1995;34: 145-51.
25. Idem. Distributing scarce livers: the moral reasoning of the general public. Soc Sci Med 1996;42:1049-55.
26. Idem. Public perceptions of the importance of prognosis in allocating transplantable livers to children. Med Decis Making 1996;16:234-41.
27. Nord E. The trade-off between severity of illness and treatment effect in cost-value analysis of health care. Health Policy 1993;24:227-38.
28. Ubel PA, Loewenstein G, Scanlon D, Kamlet M. Individual utilities are inconsistent with rationing choices: a partial explanation of why Oregon's cost-effectiveness list failed. Med Decis Making 1996;16:108-16.
29. Ubel PA, Spranca MD, Dekay ML, Hershey JC, Asch DA. Public preferences for prevention versus cure: what if an ounce of prevention is worth only an ounce of cure? Med Decis Making 1998;18:141-8.
30. Ubel PA, DeKay M, Baron J, Asch DA. Public preferences for efficiency and racial equity in kidney transplant allocation decisions. Transplant Proc 1996;28:2997-3002.
31. Ubel PA, Arnold RM, Caplan AL. Rationing failure: the ethical lessons of the retransplantation of scarce vital organs. JAMA 1993;270:2469-74.
32. Crippin J, Foster B, Carlen S, Borcich A, Bodenheimer H Jr. Retransplantation in hepatitis B - a multicenter experience. Transplantation 1994; 57:823-6.
33. D'Alessandro AM, Ploeg RJ, Krechtle SJ, et al. Retransplantation of the liver - a seven-year experience. Transplantation 1993;55:1083-7.
34. Powelson JA, Cosimi AB, Lewis WD, et al. Hepatic rctransplantation in New England - a regional experience and survival model. Transplantation 1993;55:802-6.