"No decisions about us without us"? Individual healthcare rationing in a fiscal ice age

BMJ

Volumn 342, Issue 7812, 2011, Pages

  Russell, Jill ^a   Greenhalgh, Trisha ^a   Burnett, Andrew ^b   Montgomery, Jonathan ^c  

^a QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DOCTOR PATIENT RELATION; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; FUNDING; GENERAL PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH CARE ORGANIZATION; HEALTH CARE POLICY; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE; PRIMARY MEDICAL CARE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; UNITED KINGDOM;

DECISION MAKING; GREAT BRITAIN; HEALTH CARE RATIONING; HEALTH CARE REFORM; HUMANS; PATIENT PARTICIPATION;

EID: 84859000375     PISSN: None     EISSN: 17561833     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d3279     Document Type: Review

References (32)

1. Klein R. Rationing in the fiscal ice age. Health Econ Policy Law 2010;5:389-96.
2. Department of Health. Equity and excellence: liberating the NHS. Stationery Office, 2010.
3. Jones IR, Berney L, Kelly M, Doyal L, Griffiths C, Feder G, et al. Is patient involvement possible when decisions involve scarce resources? A qualitative study of decision-making in primary care. Soc Sci Med 2004;59:93-102. (Pubitemid 38490349)
4. Richards M. Improving access to medicines for NHS patients. London: COI, 2008.
5. Adelphi Research UK. A comprehensive survey of PCTs to evaluate local decision-making processes for funding new medicines. National Prescribing Centre, 2009.
6. Clarke R, Waddell T, Gallagher J, Lee K, Radhakrishna G, Cavet J, et al. A postcode lottery still exists for cancer patients with exceptional circumstances. Clin Oncol 2008;20:771-2.
7. Rarer Cancers Forum. Taking exception. An audit of the policies and processes used by PCTs to determine exceptional funding requests. Rarer Cancers Forum, 2008.
8. Newdick C. Preserving social citizenship in health care markets: there may be trouble ahead. McGill J Law Health 2008;2:93-108.
9. Owen-Smith A, Coast J, Donovan J. "I can see where they're coming from, but when you're on the end of it ... you just want to get the money and the drug": explaining reactions to explicit healthcare rationing. Soc Sci Med 2009;68:1935-42.
10. Owen-Smith A, Coast J, Donovan J. The desirability of being open about health care rationing decisions: findings from a qualitative study of patients and clinical professionals. J Health Serv Res Policy 2010;15:14-20.
11. Marcus R. Should you tell patients about beneficial treatments that they cannot have? Yes. BMJ 2007;334:826.
12. General Medical Council. Consent: patients and doctors making decisions together. GMC, 2008.
13. Ham C, Coulter A. Explicit and implicit rationing: taking responsibility and avoiding blame for health care choices. J Health Serv Res Policy 2001;6:163.
14. Firth J. Should you tell patients about beneficial treatments that they cannot have? No. BMJ 2007;334:827.
15. Individual funding requests. From counting beans to patients. Health Serv J 2010;120:20-1.
16. Jonsen A. Bentham in a box: technology assessment and health care allocation. Law Med Health Care 1986;14:172-4.
17. Sheehan M. Resources and the rule of rescue. J Appl Philos 2007;24:352-6.
18. Department of Health. The handbook to the NHS constitution. DH, 2009.
19. House of Commons Health Committee. Top-up fees: fourth report of session 2008-9. Stationery Office, 2009.
20. Sackett D. Evidence-based medicine and treatment choices. Lancet 1997;349:570.
21. Ham C, Robert G. Reasonable rationing. International experience of priority setting in health care. Berkshire, 2003.
22. Greenhalgh T, Humphrey C, Woodard F. User involvement in health care. Wiley-Blackwell, 2011.
23. National Prescribing Centre. Defining guiding principles for processes supporting local decision making about medicines. Department of Health, 2009.
24. National Prescribing Centre. Supporting rational local decision-making about medicines (and treatments). A handbook of good practice guidance. National Prescribing Centre, 2009.
25. Harrison S, Mort M. Which champions, which people? Public and user involvement in health care as a technology of legitimation. Soc Policy Admin 1998;32:60-70. (Pubitemid 128601630)
26. Lomas J. Reluctant rationers: public input to health care priorities. J Health Serv Res Policy 1997;2:103.
27. Chisholm, A, Briggs, K, Askham, J. Not nice. Can PCTs engage patients and the public in commissioning new health technologies? Picker Institute Europe, 2009.
28. Litva A, Coast J, Donovan J, Eyles J, Shepherd M, Tacchi J, et al. 'The public is too subjective': public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making. Soc Sci Med 2002;54:1825-37. (Pubitemid 34462159)
29. Coast J, Donovan J, Litva A, Eyles J, Morgan K, Shepherd M, et alTacchi J. If there were a war tomorrow, we'd find the money: contrasting perspectives on the rationing of health care. Soc Sci Med 2002;54:1839-51. (Pubitemid 34462160)
30. Syrett K. Deconstructing deliberation in the appraisal of medical technologies: NICEly does it? Modern Law Rev 2006;69:869-94.
31. Davies C, Wetherell M, Barnett E. Citizens at the centre: deliberative participation in healthcare decisions. Policy Press, 2006.
32. Chambers S. Rhetoric and the public sphere: has deliberative democracy abandoned mass democracy? Political Theory 2009;37:323-50.