Factors influencing physicians' assessment of urgency for inpatient surgery

Journal of Health Services Research and Policy

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2001, Pages 214-219

  Arnesen, Kjell Erik ^a   Erikssen, Jan ^a   Stavem, Knut ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OSLO   (Norway)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACUTE DISEASE; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CLASSIFICATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING; ELECTIVE SURGERY; FEMALE; HOSPITAL ADMISSION; HUMAN; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; NORWAY; PATIENT SELECTION; STATISTICAL MODEL;

ACUTE DISEASE; ADULT; AGED; COHORT STUDIES; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; LOGISTIC MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEEDS ASSESSMENT; NORWAY; PATIENT SELECTION; SURGICAL PROCEDURES, ELECTIVE; WAITING LISTS;

EID: 0035488308     PISSN: 13558196     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1258/1355819011927512     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Naylor CD, Levinton CM, Baigrie RS. Adapting to waiting lists for coronary revascularization. Do Canadian specialists agree on which patients come. rst? Chest 1992; 101: 715-722
2. Naylor CD, Morgan CD, Levinton CM, Wheeler S, Hunter L, Klymciw K et al. Waiting for coronary revascularization in Toronto: 2 years’ experience with a regional referral of. ce. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1993; 149: 955-962
3. Naylor CD, Levinton CM, Wheeler S, Hunter L. Queueing for coronary surgery during severe supply-demand mismatch in a Canadian referral centre: a case study of implicit rationing. Social Science and Medicine 1993; 37: 61-67
4. Iversen T, Nord E. Priorities among waiting list patients. Developments in Health Economics and Public Policy 1992; 1: 203-216
5. Naylor CD, Levinton CM, Baigrie RS, Goldman BS. Placing patients in the queue for coronary surgery: do age and work status alter Canadian specialists’ decisions? Journal of General Internal Medicine 1992; 7: 492-498
6. Naylor CD, Baigrie RS, Goldman BS, Basinski A. Assessment of priority for coronary revascularisation procedures. Revascularisation Panel and Consensus Methods Group. Lancet 1990; 335: 1070-1073
7. Naylor CD, Basinski A, Baigrie RS, Goldman BS, Lomas J. Placing patients in the queue for coronary revascularization: evidence for practice variations from an expert panel process. American Journal of Public Health 1990; 80: 1246-1252
8. Basinski AS, Almond DG, James RG, Naylor CD. Rating the urgency of coronary angiography: results of an expert panel process. Ontario Coronary Angiography Panel. Canadian Journal of Cardiology 1993; 9: 313-321
9. Langham S, Soljak M, Keogh B, Gill M, Thorogood M, Normand C. The cardiac waiting game: are patients prioritized on the basis of clinical need? Health Services Management Research 1997; 10: 216-224
10. Desai P. The National Cataract Surgery Survey: III. Process features. Eye 1993; 7: 667-671
11. Mordue A, Parkin DW, Baxter C, Fawcett G, Stewart M. Thresholds for treatment in cataract surgery. Journal of Public Health Medicine 1994; 16: 393-398
12. Statistics Norway. Standard Classi. cation of Socio Economic Status. Oslo: Statistics Norway, 1984
13. Jackson G. Waiting for coronary bypass surgery: a lottery that fails to prevent avoidable death. International Journal of Clinical Practice 1998; 52: 67
14. Doogue M, Brett C, Elliott JM. Life and death on the waiting list for coronary bypass surgery. New Zealand Medical Journal 1997; 110: 26-30
15. Kee F, Gaffney B. Priority for coronary artery surgery: who gets by-passed when demand outstrips capacity? QJM 1995; 88: 15-22
16. Busschbach JJ, Hessing DJ, de Charro FT. The utility of health at different stages in life: a quantitative approach. Social Science and Medicine 1993; 37: 153-158
17. Johannesson M, Johansson PO. Is the valuation of a QALY gained independent of age? Some empirical evidence. Journal of Health Economics 1997; 16: 589-599
18. Nord E, Street A, Richardson J, Kuhse H, Singer P. The significance of age and duration of effect in social evaluation of health care. Health Care Analysis 1996; 4: 103-111
19. Cropper ML, Ayede SK, Portney PR. Preferences for life saving programs: how the public discounts time and age. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 1994; 8: 243-265
20. Charny MC, Lewis PA, Farrow SC. Choosing who shall not be treated in the NHS. Social Science and Medicine 1989; 28: 1331-1338
21. Mariotto A, De Leo D, Buono MD, Favaretti C, Austin P, Naylor CD. Will elderly patients stand aside for younger patients in the queue for cardiac services? Lancet 1999; 354: 467-470
22. Kee F, McDonald P, Kirwan JR, Patterson CC, Love AH. Urgency and priority for cardiac surgery: a clinical judgement analysis. BMJ 1998; 316: 925-929
23. Nord E, Pinto JL, Richardson J, Menzel P, Ubel P. Incorporating societal concerns for fairness in numerical valuations of health programmes. Health Economics 1998; 8: 25-39
24. Williams JI, Llewellyn Thomas H, Arshinoff R, Young N, Naylor CD. The burden of waiting for hip and knee replacements in Ontario. Ontario Hip and Knee Replacement Project Team. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 1997; 3: 59-68
25. Alter DA, Basinski AS, Cohen EA, Naylor CD. Fairness in the coronary angiography queue. Canadian Medical Association Journal 1999; 161: 813-817
26. Hadorn DC, Holmes AC. The New Zealand priority criteria project. Part 2: Coronary artery bypass graft surgery. BMJ 1997; 314: 135-138