An overview of allocation and rationing: implications for geriatrics.
Geriatricians are faced with increasing pressure from insurers and the public to control costs. At the same time, subspecialist colleagues, patients, and the courts often demand ever more costly high-technology interventions. This conflict will only intensify given the sustained increase in the percentage of GNP spent on medical care. A number of prominent biomedical ethicists and others have explored rationing of medical care services as one response to these concerns. This is the second in a series of articles in the Journal in response to the Oregon Health Decisions Initiative and is designed to provide (1) a brief ethical perspective on rationing and allocation; (2) an analysis of our present, largely implicit, approach to rationing and allocation; and (3) some suggestions that might move the United States closer to a more coherent and reasonable means of allocating and rationing health care.
Pawlson
L G
LG
George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC.
Glover
J J
JJ
Murphy
D J
DJ
D000368:Aged; D026686:Beneficence; D032921:Consensus; D003363:Cost Control; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005260:Female; D005853:Geriatrics / Q000191:economics; D015276:Health Care Rationing / Q000191:economics; D006299:Health Services for the Aged / Q000191:economics; D006801:Humans; D007348:Insurance, Health; D008297:Male; D008484:Medicaid / Q000191:economics; D006278:Medicare / Q000191:economics; D018579:Patient Selection; D011057:Politics; D040841:Resource Allocation; D012935:Social Justice; D012945:Social Values; D014481:United States