Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Apr 22;2(1):3.
doi: 10.1186/1478-7547-2-3.

Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges

Affiliations

Health care priority setting: principles, practice and challenges

Craig Mitton et al. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. .

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Health organizations the world over are required to set priorities and allocate resources within the constraint of limited funding. However, decision makers may not be well equipped to make explicit rationing decisions and as such often rely on historical or political resource allocation processes. One economic approach to priority setting which has gained momentum in practice over the last three decades is program budgeting and marginal analysis (PBMA). METHODS: This paper presents a detailed step by step guide for carrying out a priority setting process based on the PBMA framework. This guide is based on the authors' experience in using this approach primarily in the UK and Canada, but as well draws on a growing literature of PBMA studies in various countries. RESULTS: At the core of the PBMA approach is an advisory panel charged with making recommendations for resource re-allocation. The process can be supported by a range of 'hard' and 'soft' evidence, and requires that decision making criteria are defined and weighted in an explicit manner. Evaluating the process of PBMA using an ethical framework, and noting important challenges to such activity including that of organizational behavior, are shown to be important aspects of developing a comprehensive approach to priority setting in health care. CONCLUSION: Although not without challenges, international experience with PBMA over the last three decades would indicate that this approach has the potential to make substantial improvement on commonly relied upon historical and political decision making processes. In setting out a step by step guide for PBMA, as is done in this paper, implementation by decision makers should be facilitated.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Farrar S, Ryan M, Ross D, Ludbrook A. Using discrete choice modelling in priority setting: an application to clinical service developments. Social Science and Medicine. 2000;50:63–75. doi: 10.1016/S0277-9536(99)00268-3. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lomas J, Woods J, Veenstra G. Devolving authority for health care in Canada's provinces: 1. An introduction to the issues. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 1997;156:371–377. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mitton C, Donaldson C. Setting priorities in Canadian regional health authorities: a survey of key decision makers. Health Policy. 2002;60:39–58. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8510(01)00190-7. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Birch S, Chambers S. To each according to need: a community-based approach to allocating health care resources. Canadian Medical Association Journal. 1993;149:607–612. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Donaldson C, Mitton C, Currie G. Managing Medicare: the pre-requisite to spending or reform. The Health Papers No 157 Toronto: CD Howe Institute. 2002.

LinkOut - more resources