BMJ  2005;330:1340-1341 (11 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.330.7504.1340

Editorial

A middle way for rationing healthcare resources

Technical analysis is indispensable but only the start

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The great rationing debate has gone into one of its quiet phases. The occasionally angry controversies of the past decade or so on have ended in something remarkably like a truce between those who saw the future in terms of improved technical analysis and those who wanted better processes for decision making.¹ It is becoming increasingly apparent—and accepted—that these are complementary rather than alternative ways of tackling rationing within whole systems of health care. The technocrats and the political realists are finding common ground in the realisation that, while more information and better analysis are indeed essential, there is no once-and-for-all formula or technical fix for resolving the question of how best to allocate scarce healthcare resources. The result seems to be less interest in the theology of rationing and more emphasis on developing the methodologies of analysis and decision making.

The focus of most of this activity is . . . [Full text of this article]

London School of Economics, London WC2A 2AE
(Rudolfklein30@aol.com)

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    StumbleUpon    Technorati    What's this?

Relevant Articles

Prognosis without treatment as a modifier in health economic assessments

Ross Camidge, Andrew Walker, James J Oliver, Fiona Nussey, Simon Maxwell, Duncan Jodrell, and David J Webb
BMJ 2005 330: 1382-1384. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Accountability for reasonableness

Norman Daniels
BMJ 2000 321: 1300-1301. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Baeroe, K (2009). Priority-setting in healthcare: a framework for reasonable clinical judgements. J. Med. Ethics 35: 488-496 [Abstract] [Full text]  

Online poll

Find out more here>> and here>>