Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
1,767
result(s) for
"Health care rationing -- United States"
Sort by:
Drawing the line : healthcare rationing and the cutoff problem
Rosoff \"discusses how to decide what should and should not be covered in a generous [health care] benefits plan for all. He considers a variety of ways this might be done and concludes that the most just approach is to utilize a transparent process in which experts and lay people develop a consensus on what should be covered by focusing on both clinical evidence of need and the effective and appropriate means to address those needs. He also considers the various objections and impediments to this proposal and concludes that they are obstacles that can be successfully met\"--Amazon.com.
Book
Can We Say No?: The Challenge of Rationing Health Care
Over the past four decades, the share of income devoted to health care nearly tripled. If policy is unchanged, this trend is likely to continue. Should Americans decide to rein in the growth of health care spending, they will be forced to consider whether to ration care for the well-insured, a prospect that is odious and unthinkable to many. This book argues that sensible health care rationing can not only save money but improve general welfare and public health. It reviews the experience with health care rationing in Great Britain. The choices the British have made point up the nature of the options Americans will face if they wish to keep public health care budgets from driving taxes ever higher and private health care spending from crowding out increases in other forms of worker compensation and consumption. This book explains why serious consideration of health care rationing is inescapable. It also provides the information policymakers and concerned citizens need to think clearly about these difficult issues and engage in an informed debate.
eBook
Just caring : health care rationing and democratic deliberation
What does it mean to be a “just” and “caring” society when we have only limited resources to meet unlimited health care needs? Do we believe that all lives are of equal value? Is human life priceless? Should a “just” and “caring” society refuse to put limits on health care spending? In Just Caring, Leonard Fleck reflects on the central moral and political challenges of health reform today. He cites the millions of Americans who go without health insurance, thousands of whom die prematurely, unable to afford the health care needed to save their lives. Fleck considers these deaths as contrary to our deepest social values, and makes a case for the necessity of health care rationing decisions. The core argument of this book is that no one has a moral right to impose rationing decisions on others if they are unwilling to impose those same rationing decisions on themselves in the same medical circumstances. Fleck argues we can make health care rationing fair, in ways that are mutually respectful, if we engage in honest rational democratic deliberation. Such civic engagement is rare in our society, but the alternative is endless destructive social controversy that is neither just nor caring.
eBook
Fair Allocation of Scarce Medical Resources in the Time of Covid-19
The Covid-19 pandemic has already stressed health care systems throughout the world, requiring rationing of medical equipment and care. The authors discuss the ethical values relevant to health care rationing and provide six recommendations to guide fair allocation of scarce medical resources during the pandemic.
Journal Article
The Toughest Triage — Allocating Ventilators in a Pandemic
Of all the medical care that will have to be rationed during the Covid-19 pandemic, the most problematic will be mechanical ventilation. One strategy for avoiding debilitating distress over these decisions is to use a triage committee to buffer bedside clinicians.
Journal Article
Disability, Ethics, and Health Care in the COVID-19 Pandemic
This article considers key ethical, legal, and medical dilemmas arising for people with disabilities in the COVID-19 pandemic. We highlight the limited application of existing frameworks of emergency planning with and for people with disabilities in the COVID-19 pandemic, explore key concerns and issues affecting the health care of people with disabilities (i.e., access to information and clinician–patient communication, nondiscrimination and reasonable accommodations, and rationing of medical goods), and indicate possible solutions. Finally, we suggest clinical and public health policy measures to ensure that people with disabilities are included in the planning of future pandemic-related efforts. The devastation evoked by the COVID-19 pandemic raises challenging dilemmas in bioethics. It also speaks to social justice issues that have plagued historically marginalized communities in the United States. Responses to the pandemic must be bound by legal standards, principles of distributive justice, and societal norms of protecting vulnerable populations—core commitments of public health—to ensure that inequities are not exacerbated, and should provide a pathway for improvements to ensure equitable access and treatment in the future.
Journal Article
The Myth of the Workforce Crisis. Why the United States Does Not Need More Intensivist Physicians
Abstract
Intensivist physician staffing is associated with lower mortality in the intensive care unit (ICU), yet many ICUs are not staffed by trained intensivists. This gap has led to a number of proposals intended to increase the intensivist supply in the United States. In this perspective we argue that such efforts would be both ineffective and ill-advised. Because many ICU patients are not critically ill, workforce models that base demand projections on ICU admission rather than true critical illness substantially overstate the workforce gap. Even in the presence of a workforce gap, training new intensivists would not place them in hospitals where they are needed most, would not mitigate the shortage of nonphysician critical care providers, and would require a unrealistic increase in spending on physician training. In addition, efforts to train more intensivists require us to prioritize intensive care over other specialties that are also in short supply, without clear justification for why intensivists are more important. Rather than continuing an unwarranted push to increase the intensivist supply, we suggest alternative workforce policies that emphasize novel interprofessional care models (to improve ICU quality in the absence of intensivists) combined with limitations on the future growth of ICU beds (to reduce demand through implicit rationing of care). These policies offer opportunities to reduce the mismatch between critical care supply and demand without an unnecessary expansion of the intensivist supply.
Journal Article
Disease and healthcare burden of COVID-19 in the United States
As of 24 April 2020, the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic has resulted in over 830,000 confirmed infections in the United States
1
. The incidence of COVID-19, the disease associated with this new coronavirus, continues to rise. The epidemic threatens to overwhelm healthcare systems, and identifying those regions where the disease burden is likely to be high relative to the rest of the country is critical for enabling prudent and effective distribution of emergency medical care and public health resources. Globally, the risk of severe outcomes associated with COVID-19 has consistently been observed to increase with age
2
,
3
. We used age-specific mortality patterns in tandem with demographic data to map projections of the cumulative case burden of COVID-19 and the subsequent burden on healthcare resources. The analysis was performed at the county level across the United States, assuming a scenario in which 20% of the population of each county acquires infection. We identified counties that will probably be consistently, heavily affected relative to the rest of the country across a range of assumptions about transmission patterns, such as the basic reproductive rate, contact patterns and the efficacy of quarantine. We observed a general pattern that per capita disease burden and relative healthcare system demand may be highest away from major population centers. These findings highlight the importance of ensuring equitable and adequate allocation of medical care and public health resources to communities outside of major urban areas.
Projection of the number of COVID-19 cases and the associated burden on healthcare resources using a modified SEIR model reveals that rural regions in the United States are at risk of higher per capita case burdens, which could lead to health systems being overwhelmed in these areas.
Journal Article
Disability During a Pandemic: Student Reflections on Risk, Inequity, and Opportunity
As graduate students focusing on disability and public health, some of whom are living with disabilities ourselves, we have seen the COVID-19 pandemic pose great risk to people with disabilities. This is happening not only because of preexisting conditions but also because of the entrenched social inequities people with disabilities face. The initial exclusion of people with disabilities in the US public health response has led to widening disparities, shortcomings in engaging and equitably supporting individuals with disabilities, and practices that devalue the lives of those with disabilities.For example, several states proposed rationing medical care if medical systems became overwhelmed.1 Rooted in ableism (i.e., discrimination in favor of nondisabled people), these plans explicitly singled out people with disabilities and chronic health conditions as members of our community who would not receive health care in times of rationing.1 We hear those without disabilities assure one another notto worry because only those with preexisting conditions are at risk for dying from COVID-19. Furthermore, we are concerned that premature institutionalization of people with disabilities to free hospital beds during the COVID-19 outbreaks has perpetuated disablist practices (i.e., discrimination and prejudice against people with disabilities) and placed the lives of those with disabilities, including our peers, friends, and family, in grave danger.2 During the COVID-19 pandemic, when nursing homes and long-term care facilities are among the deadliest locations, people with disabilities who want to remain in their homes have the right to home- and community-based services.
Journal Article