Advanced

Lack of support structures in prioritization decision making concerning patients and resources. Interviews with Swedish physicians.

Werntoft, Elisabet LU and Edberg, Anna-Karin LU (2011) In Scandinavian Journal of Public Health 39(6). p.627-633
Abstract
AIM: To investigate physicians' experiences in relation to prioritization and financing in health care in order to gain a deeper understanding of the reasons behind their standpoints. METHODS: Eighteen physicians, seven womenand eleven men, aged 30 to 69 years were interviewed and the text was analyzed using an inductive approach, also described as conventional qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Experience of setting healthcare priorities and difficult decision making differed widely among the physicians and seemed to be related to the number of years in professional practice. Their view of how resources should be allocated between disciplines/patients showed that they wanted politicians to make the decisions, with support from medical... (More)
AIM: To investigate physicians' experiences in relation to prioritization and financing in health care in order to gain a deeper understanding of the reasons behind their standpoints. METHODS: Eighteen physicians, seven womenand eleven men, aged 30 to 69 years were interviewed and the text was analyzed using an inductive approach, also described as conventional qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Experience of setting healthcare priorities and difficult decision making differed widely among the physicians and seemed to be related to the number of years in professional practice. Their view of how resources should be allocated between disciplines/patients showed that they wanted politicians to make the decisions, with support from medical professions. The overwhelming impression of their reasoning showed that they lacked support structures for their decision making and could be understood under the following categories: Prioritisation, easier in theory than in practice, and Increasing costs threaten theSwedishwelfare model. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study highlight the importance of practical national guidelines concerning vertical prioritization, also as an important measure to make prioritization more distinct and transparent. The physicians further had a need for tools to increase patients' awareness of their health. The findings of this study also showed that an awareness of the actual costs involved might increase the responsibility among both physicians and patients. The physicians' lack of support structures implies an urgent need for practical national guidelines, especially concerning vertical prioritization. This will also make prioritization appear clear and transparent for citizens. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Scandinavian Journal of Public Health
volume
39
issue
6
pages
627 - 633
publisher
Taylor & Francis
external identifiers
  • wos:000293249400009
  • pmid:21727147
  • scopus:79961058200
ISSN
1651-1905
DOI
10.1177/1403494811414250
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
6a6eb4f6-2605-4ec7-bebd-a54c2186f93a (old id 2058999)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21727147?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2011-08-01 19:15:19
date last changed
2017-01-01 06:20:57
@article{6a6eb4f6-2605-4ec7-bebd-a54c2186f93a,
  abstract     = {AIM: To investigate physicians' experiences in relation to prioritization and financing in health care in order to gain a deeper understanding of the reasons behind their standpoints. METHODS: Eighteen physicians, seven womenand eleven men, aged 30 to 69 years were interviewed and the text was analyzed using an inductive approach, also described as conventional qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Experience of setting healthcare priorities and difficult decision making differed widely among the physicians and seemed to be related to the number of years in professional practice. Their view of how resources should be allocated between disciplines/patients showed that they wanted politicians to make the decisions, with support from medical professions. The overwhelming impression of their reasoning showed that they lacked support structures for their decision making and could be understood under the following categories: Prioritisation, easier in theory than in practice, and Increasing costs threaten theSwedishwelfare model. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study highlight the importance of practical national guidelines concerning vertical prioritization, also as an important measure to make prioritization more distinct and transparent. The physicians further had a need for tools to increase patients' awareness of their health. The findings of this study also showed that an awareness of the actual costs involved might increase the responsibility among both physicians and patients. The physicians' lack of support structures implies an urgent need for practical national guidelines, especially concerning vertical prioritization. This will also make prioritization appear clear and transparent for citizens.},
  author       = {Werntoft, Elisabet and Edberg, Anna-Karin},
  issn         = {1651-1905},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {6},
  pages        = {627--633},
  publisher    = {Taylor & Francis},
  series       = {Scandinavian Journal of Public Health},
  title        = {Lack of support structures in prioritization decision making concerning patients and resources. Interviews with Swedish physicians.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1403494811414250},
  volume       = {39},
  year         = {2011},
}