The relevance of personal characteristics in allocating health care resources-controversial preferences of laypersons with different educational backgrounds

International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health

Volumn 9, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 223-243

  Winkelhage, Jeannette ^a   Diederich, Adele ^a  

^a JACOBS UNIVERSITY BREMEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

Conjoint analysis; Distributive justice; Distributive preferences; Germany; Health behavior; Prioritizing; Public attitudes; Socialization theory

Indexed keywords

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT; HEALTH CARE; HEALTH SERVICES; PRIORITIZATION; PUBLIC ATTITUDE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGE DETERMINATION; AGED; ARTICLE; CHRONIC DISEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE SEVERITY; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; FEMALE; GERMANY; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE DISTRIBUTION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE UTILIZATION; HUMAN; HUMAN CHARACTERISTIC; LIFESTYLE; MALE; PATIENT ASSESSMENT; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; RESOURCE ALLOCATION; SOCIALIZATION;

GERMANY;

EID: 84856320581     PISSN: None     EISSN: 16604601     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph9010223     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Hauck, K.; Smith, P.C.; Goddard, M. The economics of priority setting for health care. A literature review. HNP Discuss. Paper 2004, 1-74.
2. Sabik, L.M.; Lie, R.K. Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries. International Journal for Equity in Health 2008, 7, 1-13.
3. Strech, D.; Danis, M.; Löb, M.; Marckmann, G. Ausmaß und Auswirkungen von Rationierung in deutschen Krankenhäusern-Ärztliche Einschätzungen aus einer repräsentativen Umfrage (in German). Dtsch. Med. Wochenschr. 2009, 134, 1261-1266.
4. Brockmann, H. Why is less money spent on health care for the elderly than for the rest of the population? Health care rationing in German hospitals. Soc. Sci. Med. 2002, 55, 593-608.
5. Bruni, R.A.; Laupacis, A.; Martin, D.K. Public engagement in setting priorities in health care. Can. Med. Assoc. J. 2008, 179, 15-18.
6. Diederich, A.; Winkelhage, J.; Schnoor, M.; Schreier, M. Öffentlicher Diskurs erforderlich. Dtsch. Ärzteblatt 2009, 106, A 654-656.
7. Cookson, R.; Dolan, P. Public views on health care rationing: A group discussion study. Health Policy 1999, 49, 63-74.
8. Green, C. Investigating public preferences on 'Severity of health' as a relevant condition for setting healthcare priorities. Soc. Sci. Med. 2009, 68, 2247-2255.
9. Wilmot, S.; Ratcliffe, J. Principles of distributive justice used by members of the general public in the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation: A qualitative study. Health Expect. 2002, 5, 199-209.
10. Green, C.; Gerard, K. Exploring the social of health-care interventions: A stated preference discrete choice experiment. Health Econ. 2009, 18, 951-976.
11. Nord, E.; Richardson, J.; Street, A.; Kuhse, H.; Singer, P. Maximizing health benefits vs. egalitarianism-An Australian survey of health issues. Soc. Sci. Med. 1995, 41, 1429-1437.
12. Hadorn, D.C. Setting health care priorities in Oregon. Cost-effectiveness meets the rule of rescue J. Am. Med. Assoc. 1991, 265, 2218-2225.
13. Sassi, F.; Archard, L.; Le Grand, L. Equity and the economic evaluation of healthcare. Health Technol. Asses. 2001, 5, 1-138.
14. Nord, E.; Richardson, J.; Street, A.; Kuhse, H.; Singer, P. Who cares about cost? Does economic analysis impose or reflect social values? Health Policy 1995, 34, 79-94.
15. Tsuchiya, A. Age-related preferences and age weighting health benefits. Soc. Sci. Med. 1999, 48, 267-276.
16. Diederich, A.; Schreier, M. Einstellungen zu Priorisierungen in der medizinischen Versorgung: Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Bevölkerungsbefragung. FOR655: Bremen, Germany, 2010. Available online: http://www.priorisierung-in-der-medizin.de/documents/FOR655_Nr27_Diederich_Schreier.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2011).
17. Lees, A.; Scott, N.; Scott, S.N.; MacDonald, S.; Campbell, C. Deciding how NHS money is spent: A survey of general public and medical views. Health Expect. 2002, 5, 47-54.
18. Ryynänen, O.P.; Myllykangas, M.; Kinnunen, J.; Takala, J. Attitudes to health care prioritisation methods and criteria among nurses, doctors, politicians and the general public. Soc. Sci. Med. 1999, 49, 1529-1539.
19. Gallego, G.; Taylor, S.J.; McNeill, P.; Brien, J.A.E. Public views on priority setting for high cost medications in public hospitals in Australia. Health Expect. 2007, 10, 224-235.
20. Shmueli, A. Horizontal equity in medical care: A study of the Israeli public's views. Isr. Med. Assoc. J. 2000, 2, 746-752.
21. Diederich, A.; Schreier, M. Zur Akzeptanz von Eigenverantwortung als Posteriorisierungskriterium. Bundesgesundheitsbl 2010, 53, 896-902.
22. Diederich, A.; Winkelhage, J.; Wirsik, N. Age as a criterion for setting priorities in health care? A survey of the German public view. PLoS One 2011, 6, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023930.
23. Kuder, L.B.; Roeder, P.W. Attitudes toward age-based health care rationing: A qualitative assessment. J. Aging Health 1995, 7, 301-327.
24. Mossialos, E.; King, D. Citizens and rationing: Analysis of a European survey. Health Policy 1999, 49, 75-135.
25. Schwappach, D.L.B.; Strasmann, T.J. "Quick and dirty numbers"? The reliability of a stated-preference technique for the measurement of preferences for resource allocation. J. Health Econ. 2006, 25, 432-448.
26. Winkelhage, J.; Diederich, A.; Schreier, M. Explorationsstudien zur Priorisierung medizinischer Leistungen: Kriterien und Präferenzen von gesunden und erkrankten Personen. FOR 655: Bremen, Germany, 2009. Available online: http://www.priorisierung-in-der-medizin.de/documents/FOR655_Nr19_Winkelhage.pdf (accessed on 05 October 2010).
27. Oddsson, K. Assessing attitude towards prioritizing in healthcare in Iceland. Health Policy 2003, 66, 135-146.
28. Dolan, P.; Shaw, R.; Tsuchiya, A.; Williams, A. QALY maximisation and people's preferences: A methodological review of the literature. Health Econ. 2005, 14, 197-208.
29. Schwappach, D.L.B. Resource allocation, social values and the QALY: A review of the debate and empirical evidence. Health Expect. 2002, 5, 210-222.
30. Ratcliffe, J. Public preferences for the allocation of donor liver grafts for transplantation. Health Econ. 2000, 9, 137-148.
31. Bowling, A. Health care rationing: The public's debate. Br. Med. J. 1996, 312, 670-674.
32. Rodríguez-Miguez, E.; Herrero, C.; Pinto-Prades, J.L. Using a point system in the management of waiting lists: The case of cataracts. Soc. Sci. Med. 2004, 59, 585-594.
33. Louviere, J.; Hensher, D.A.; Swait, J.D. Stated Choice Methods. Analysis and Application; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2000; pp. 1-418.
34. Ryan, M.; Gerard, K.; Amaya-Amaya, M. Using discrete choice experiemts to value health and health care. In The Economics of Non-Market Goods and Recources; Bateman, I.J., Ed.; Springer Verlag: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2008; volume 11, pp. 1-276.
35. Schwappach, D.L.B. Does it matter who you are or what you gain? An experimental study of preferences for resource allocation. Health Econ. 2003, 12, 255-267.
36. Andreß, H.-J.; Heien, T. Four world of welfare state attitudes? A comparison of Germany, Norway, and the United States. Eur. Sociol. Rev. 2001, 17, 337-356.
37. Scott, J.; Marshall, G. A Dictionary of Sociology; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK; Oxford Reference Online: 2009. Available online: http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html? entry=t88.e2182&srn=1&ssid=1007099119#FIRSTHIT (accessed on 31 March 2010).
38. Geulen, D. Sozialisation. In Lehrbuch der Soziologie (in German), 2nd ed.; Joas, H., Ed.; Campus Verlag: Frankfurt, Germany and New York, NY, USA, 2003; pp. 123-144.
39. Singh-Manoux, A.; Marmot, M. Role of socialization in explaining social inequalities in health. Soc. Sci. Med. 2005, 60, 2129-2133.
40. Faulstich-Wieland, H. Sozialisation und Geschlecht. In Handbuch Sozialisationsforschung (in German), 7th ed.; Hurrelmann, K., Grundmann, M., Walper, S., Eds.; Betz Verlag: Weinheim, Germany and Basel, Switzerland, 2008; pp. 240-253.
41. Kohn, M.K., Naoi, A., Schoenbach, C, Schooler, C, Slomczynski, K.M. Position in the class structure and psychological functioning in the United States, Japan, and Poland. Am. J. Sociol. 1990, 95, 964-1008.
42. Hurrelmann, K. Einführung in die Sozialisationstheorie (in German), 9th ed.; Beltz Verlag: Weinheim, Germany and Basel, Switzerland, 2006; pp. 1-328.
43. Green, P.E.; Srinivasan, V. Conjoint analysis in consumer research: Issues and outlook. J. Consum. Res. 1978, 5, 103-123.
44. Orme, B.K. Getting Started with Conjoint Analysis: Strategies for Product Design and Pricing Research; Research Publishers LLC: Madison, WI, USA, 2006; pp. 1-179.
45. SPSS Inc. SPSS Conjoint™ 17.0; SPSS Inc.: Chicago, IL, USA, 2008; Vol. 17, pp. 1-55. Available online: https://www.washington.edu/uware/spss/docs/SPSS%20Conjoint%2017.0.pdf (accessed on 28 July 2011).
46. Klein, M. Die Conjoint-Analyse: Eine Einführung in das Verfahren mit einem Ausblick auf mögliche sozialwissenschaftliche Anwendungen (in German); ZA-Information: Köln, Germany, 2002. Available online: http://www.mathe.tu-freiberg.de/inst/stoch/Lehre/WiWi_Statistik/WPF_WiWi/SOE/Untersuchung/Conjoint.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2011).
47. Schreier, M. Qualitative Stichprobenkonzepte. In Qualitative Marktforschung in Theorie und Praxis (in German); Naderer, G., Balzer, E., Eds.; Gabler: Wiesbaden, Germany, 2007; pp. 233-245.
48. Anger, C.; Plünnecke, A.; Seyda, S.; Werner, D.; Schäfer, H. Bildungsarmut und Humankapitalschwäche in Deutschland (in German); Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft Köln: Köln, Germany, 2006. Available online: http://www.dihk.de/inhalt/download/gutachten_bildungsarmut.pdf (accessed on 11 June 2009).
49. Wirsik, N.; Diederich, A.; Schreier, M. Conjoint-Analyse: Prätest zur Evaluation von patientenbezogenen Merkmalen und dem Einfluss von Proxies auf die Bildung der Rangfolge (in German); FOR 655: Bremen, Germany, 2009. Available online: http://www.priorisierung-in-der-medizin.de/documents/FOR655_Nr22_Wirsik.pdf (accessed on 20 July 2011).
50. Fahrmeir, L.; Künstler, R.; Pigeot, I.; Tutz, G. Statistik. Der Weg zur Datenanalyse, 7th ed.; Springer: Heidelberg, Germany, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, London, UK and New York, NY, USA, 2010; pp. 1-626.
51. Buyx, A.M. Personal responsibility for health as a rationing criterion: Why we don't like it and why maybe we should. J. Med. Ethics 2008, 34, 871-874.
52. Elo, I.T. Social class differentials in health and mortality: Patterns and explanations in comparative perspective. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 2009, 35, 553-572.
53. Myllykangas, M.; Ryynänen, O.-P.; Lammintakanen, J.; Isomäki, V.-P.; Kinnunen, J.; Halonen, P. Clinical management and prioritisation criteria. J. Health Organ. Manag. 2003, 17, 338-348.
54. Leist, A. Chancengleichheit in der Medizin. In Gerechtigkeit im politischen Diskurs der Gegenwart (in German); Koller, P., Ed.; Passagen Verlag:Veinna, Austria, 2001; pp. 303-326.
55. Marckmann, G. Alter als Verteilungskriterium in der Gesundheitsversorgung. In Gerecht behandelt? Rationierung und Priorisierung im Gesundheitswesen (in German); Schöne-Seifert, B., Buyx, A., Ach, J.S., Eds.; Mentis-Verlag: Paderborn, Germany, 2006; pp. 163-181.
56. Farrar, S.; Ryan, M. Response-ordering effects: A methodological issue in conjoint analysis. Health Econ. 1999, 8, 75-79.
57. Huster, S. Altersrationierung im Gesundheitswesen: (Un-)Zulässigkeit und Ausgestaltung (in German). Medizinrecht 2010, 28, 369-372.
58. Zweibel, N.R.; Cassel, C.K.; Karrison, T. Public attitudes about the use of chronological age as a criterion for allocating health care resources. Gerontologist 1993, 33, 74-80.
59. Rodríguez, E.; Pinto, J.L. The social value of health programs: Is age a relevant factor? Health Econ. 2000, 9, 611-621.