Clinical and lay preferences for the explicit prioritisation of elective waiting lists: survey evidence from Wales

被引:44
作者
Edwards, RT
Boland, A
Wilkinson, C
Cohen, D
Williams, J
机构
[1] Univ Wales, Ctr Hlth Econ, Inst Med & Social Care Res, Bangor LL57 2UW, Gwynedd, Wales
[2] Univ Liverpool, Dept Pharmacol & Therapeut, Old Infirm, Liverpool L69 3BF, Merseyside, England
[3] Univ Wales, Coll Med, Dept Gen Practice, N Wales Sect, Wrexham LL13 7YP, Wales
[4] Univ Glamorgan, Sch Care Sci, Pontypridd CF37 1DL, M Glam, Wales
[5] Univ Coll Swansea, Morriston Hosp, Sch Postgrad Studies Med & Hlth Care, Swansea SA6 6NL, W Glam, Wales
关键词
rationing; waiting lists; clinical and social criteria;
D O I
10.1016/S0168-8510(02)00101-X
中图分类号
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号
摘要
Waiting lists are a persistent feature of public health care systems. The United Kingdom National Health Service (NHS) is considering priority scoring systems as a means of ensuring that patients are treated according to clinical need rather than maximum waiting time targets. Our objective was to elicit the preferences of those involved in the finance, delivery and receipt of elective health care regarding the clinical and social factors that should and should not determine waiting time. We conducted a postal survey of 750 general practitioners, 500 consultants, 29 health authority commissioners and 1000 members of the general public across Wales. We found both professional and lay support for a more explicit system of rationing access to elective health care by waiting list. The majority of each of the survey groups believe that level of pain, rate of deterioration of disease, level of distress and level of disability should play the most influential role in determining waiting times. They agree that age, ability to pay, cost of treatment, evidence of cost-effectiveness, existence of dependants, and self-inflicted ill health should have little or no influence on patient priority. In conclusion, were the NHS to widen its use of waiting list priority scoring systems, our study suggests that there may be some degree of consensus as to the criteria to be used. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:229 / 237
页数:9
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1991, PAT CHART
[2]  
*BRIT MED ASS, 1998, WAIT LIST PRIOR SCOR
[3]  
DILLMAN D, 1978, TOTAL DESIGN METHOD
[4]   Points for pain: Waiting list priority scoring systems - May be the way forward, but we need to learn more about their effects [J].
Edwards, RT .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7181) :412-414
[5]  
EDWARDS RT, 1997, NHS WAITING LISTS EL
[6]  
Frankel S., 1993, RATIONING RATIONALIT
[7]   BMA proposes strategy to reformulate waiting lists [J].
Fricker, J .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1999, 318 (7176) :78-78
[8]   The New Zealand priority criteria project .1. Overview [J].
Hadorn, DC ;
Holmes, AC .
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL, 1997, 314 (7074) :131-134
[9]  
Kaner EF, 1998, BRIT J GEN PRACT, V48, P1067
[10]  
Lack A, 2000, J Health Serv Res Policy, V5, P83