title: How clinical rationing works in practice: A case study of morbid obesity surgery.
abstract: Difficulties in setting healthcare priorities are encountered throughout the world. There is no agreement on the most appropriate principles or methods for healthcare rationing although there is some consensus that it should be undertaken as systematically and accountably as possible. Although some steps towards achieving accountability have been made at the macro and meso level, at the consultation level rationing remains implicit and poorly understood. Using morbid obesity surgery as a case study, we observed a series of UK National Health Service consultations where rationing was ongoing and conducted in-depth interviews with doctors and patients (2011-2014). A longitudinal approach was taken to research and in total 22 consultations were observed and 78 interviews were undertaken. Sampling was undertaken purposively and theoretically and analyses were undertaken thematically. Clinicians needed to prioritise 55 patients from 450 eligible referrals, but disagreed over the extent to which clinical and financial factors were the driving force behind decision-making. The most prominent rationing technique observed in consultations was rationing by selection, but examples of rationing by delay, by deterrence, and by deflection were also commonplace. Although all clinicians sought to avoid rationing by denial, only six of the 22 patients recruited to the research were known to have been treated at the end of the three-year period. Most clinicians sought to manage rationing implicitly, and only one explained the link between decision-making criteria and financial constraints on care availability. Although existing frameworks for categorising NHS rationing techniques were useful in identifying implicit strategies, in practice these techniques over-lapped substantially and we have proposed a simpler framework for analysing NHS rationing decisions at the consultation level, which includes just three categories - rationing by exclusion, rationing by deterrence, and rationing by delay.
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, United Kingdom. Electronic address: a.owen-smith@bris.ac.uk.
authors.forename: Amanda
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Owen-Smith
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Jenny
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Donovan
authors.affiliation: School of Social and Community Medicine, University of Bristol, United Kingdom.
authors.forename: Joanna
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Coast
mesh_terms: D050110:Bariatric Surgery / Q000191:economics*; D003657:Decision Making; D015276:Health Care Rationing / Q000191:economics*; D006292:Health Priorities / Q000191:economics; D006801:Humans; D008137:Longitudinal Studies; D008875:Middle Aged; D009767:Obesity, Morbid / Q000191:economics*; D013222:State Medicine / Q000191:economics*
keywords: Healthcare rationing; Morbid obesity; NHS; Observation; Priority setting; Qualitative; Resource allocation; UK