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
. 2008 Jan 21:7:4.
doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-7-4.

Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries

Affiliations

Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries

Lindsay M Sabik et al. Int J Equity Health. .

Abstract

All health care systems face problems of justice and efficiency related to setting priorities for allocating a limited pool of resources to a population. Because many of the central issues are the same in all systems, the United States and other countries can learn from the successes and failures of countries that have explicitly addressed the question of health care priorities.We review explicit priority setting efforts in Norway, Sweden, Israel, the Netherlands, Denmark, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the state of Oregon in the US. The approaches used can be divided into those centered on outlining principles versus those that define practices. In order to establish the main lessons from their experiences we consider (1) the process each country used, (2) criteria to judge the success of these efforts, (3) which approaches seem to have met these criteria, and (4) using their successes and failures as a guide, how to proceed in setting priorities. We demonstrate that there is little evidence that establishment of a values framework for priority setting has had any effect on health policy, nor is there evidence that priority setting exercises have led to the envisaged ideal of an open and participatory public involvement in decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Beauchamp TL, Childress JF. Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 5th. New York , Oxford University Press; 2001.
    1. Eddy DM. Clinical Decision-making: From Theory to Practice. The Individual vs Society. Resolving the Conflict. JAMA. 1991;265:2405–2396. - PubMed
    1. Eddy DM. Clinical Decision-making: From Theory to Practice. The Individual vs Society. Is There a Conflict? . JAMA. 1991;265:1446, 1449–1450. - PubMed
    1. Emanuel EJ. Justice and Managed Care. Four Principles for the Just Allocation of Health Care Resources. Hastings Center Report. 2000;30:8–16. doi: 10.2307/3528040. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Fleck LM. Healthcare Justice and Rational Democratic Deliberation. American Journal of Bioethics. 2001;1:20–21. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources