The significance of selected preventive therapeutic and rehabilitative health services as reflected by a population survey;Die bedeutung ausgewählter präventiver, therapeutischer und rehabilitativer leistungen im spiegel eines bevölkerungssurveys

Gesundheitswesen

Volumn 63, Issue 5, 2001, Pages 302-310

  Westphal, R ^a   Rostermundt A ^a   Raspe, H ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF LÜBECK   (Germany)

Author keywords

Deficits of Statutory Health Insurance Bodies; Preferences and Assessments of Insured Population, Rationing; Priority Setting; Rationalising Health Benefits

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHILD CARE; DECISION MAKING; GERMANY; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; HEALTH INSURANCE; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; QUESTIONNAIRE; RATING SCALE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; CHILD; COST CONTROL; DATA COLLECTION; FEMALE; FORECASTING; GERMANY; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH SERVICES ACCESSIBILITY; HEALTH SERVICES RESEARCH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NATIONAL HEALTH PROGRAMS; PREVENTIVE HEALTH SERVICES; REHABILITATION; THERAPEUTICS;

EID: 17644443692     PISSN: 09413790     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-2001-14211     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Leitlinien und standards im gesundheitswesen
2. Plädoyer für eine offene rationierungsdebatte
3. Prioritätensetzung in der medizinischen Versorgung im System der Gesetzlichen Krankenversicherung (GKV): Müssen und können wir uns entscheiden?
4. Public involvement in priority setting: Are the methods used appropriate and valid?
5. Setting priorities: Is there a role for citizens' juries?
6. Comparisons of the costs and quality of patient data collection by mail versus telephone versus in-person interviews
7. Health care rationing: The public's debate
8. The distribution of resources in health care
9. Who should decide? Qualitative analysis of panel data from public patients, healthcare professionals and insurers on priorities in health care
10. Whose priorities? Listening to users and the public
11. Health service priorities: Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals on priority setting in an inner London health district
12. Involving the public: Practical and ethical issues
13. Value judgement in the Oregon medicaid experiment
14. Relevanz und finanzierung von gesundheitsleistungen: Eine befragung von ärzten, studenten, patienten, pflegepersonal und senioren
15. Priority setting: Lessons from Oregon
16. Reform des gesundheitswesens - Die meinung der ärzte
17. Wachsendes vertrauen in naturheilmittel