covid
Buscar en
Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública Racionamento dos cuidados de saúde e a participação da sociedade: revisão do...
Información de la revista
Vol. 28. Núm. 2.
Páginas 119-126 (julio - diciembre 2010)
Compartir
Compartir
Descargar PDF
Más opciones de artículo
Vol. 28. Núm. 2.
Páginas 119-126 (julio - diciembre 2010)
Artigo original
Open Access
Racionamento dos cuidados de saúde e a participação da sociedade: revisão do debate
Health care rationing and community participation: a review of the debate
Visitas
4208
Micaela Moreira Pinhoa,
Autor para correspondencia
michaelapinho@hotmail.com

Autor para correspondência.
, Paula Veigab
a Universidade Lusíada do Porto e Universidade Portucalense; membro do Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA). Porto, Portugal
b Escola de Economia e Gestão da Universidade do Minho; membro do Núcleo de Investigação em Microeconomia Aplicada (NIMA). Porto, Portuga
Este artículo ha recibido

Under a Creative Commons license
Información del artículo
Resumen
Bibliografía
Descargar PDF
Estadísticas
Resumo
Introdução

O tradicional modelo discricionário de estabelecer prioridades na saúde tem vindo a ser questionado por muitos decisores políticos que procuram lidar com esta realidade de forma mais explícita. Explicitar o modo de estabelecer prioridades tem suscitado intensos debates, sobretudo e em particular no que respeita à contribuição da economia e ao envolvimento da população.

Material e métodos

A revisão bibliográfica permitiu, não apenas, rever o debate em torno da evolução a que tem estado sujeito o processo de priorização dos serviços de saúde ao longo das três últimas décadas como também descrever a problemática associada à participação da comunidade no debate sobre o racionamento e conhecer algumas reformas internacionais que procuraram conferir ao racionamento um carácter mais transparente.

Resultado

A par das reformas para a adopção de critérios sistemáticos de racionar os cuidados de saúde surge o debate sobre o papel a conferir à população nesse processo. Apesar de algum consenso sobre a necessidade de conferir um papel mais interventivo às populações, não há consenso sobre os limites e modelos de participação. A tarefa, na prática, tem-se revelado complexa e conflituosa.

Conclusão

A implementação de sistemas de racionamento com carácter mais explícito e transparente continua em discussão na literatura. As soluções parecem depender essencialmente da vontade política e do contexto cultural de cada país.

Palavras-chave:
Racionamento
Sistemas de saúde
Envolvimento da comunidade
Keywords:
Rationing
Health care systems
Community involvement
Abstract
Introduction

The traditional discretionary model to set priorities in health care have been questioned by policy makers who seek to address this issue more explicitly. Setting priorities in an explicit way has sparked an intense debate, especially and particularly in what concerns economics contribution and public involvement.

Material and methods

A literature review allowed not only an account of the debate about the evolution of the process concerning the setting of priorities within the health care services during the last three decades but also to describe the problematic discussion related to the community participation in the rationing debate, as well as to know some international reforms that tried to implement a more transparent rationing process.

Results

Alongside with the reforms to adopt systematic principles to ration health care services, there is a debate about the role that population should play in that process. Although there is some consensus that population should be more involved, there is no consensus about the limits and model of participation. The task, in practice, has proved to be complex and a source of conflict.

Conclusions

The implementation of a more explicit and transparent health care rationing process is still under debate. The solutions seem to depend on the political will and the cultural context of each country.

El Texto completo está disponible en PDF
Bibliografia
[1.]
P. Mullen.
Public involvement in health care priority setting: an overview of methods for eliciting values.
Health Expect., 2 (1999), pp. 222-234
[2.]
D. Hunter.
Rationing dilemmas in Healthcare.
NAHAT, (1993),
[3.]
E. Tragakes, M. Vienonen.
Key issues in rationing and priority setting for health care services.
World Health Organization, WHO Regional Office for Europe, (1998),
[4.]
K. Obermann, D. Buck.
The health care rationing debate: more clarity by separating the issues?.
Eur J Health Econ., 2 (2001), pp. 113-117
[5.]
J. Coast, J. Donovan, S. Frankel.
Priority setting: the health care debate.
John Wiley and Sons, (1996),
[6.]
M. Pinho, P. Veiga.
Avaliação de custo-utilidade como mecanismo de alocação de recursos em saúde: revisão do debate.
Cad Saúde Pública., 25 (2009), pp. 239-250
[7.]
R. Robinson.
Limits to rationality: economics, economists and priority setting.
Health Policy., 49 (1999), pp. 13-26
[8.]
R. Klein.
Dimensions of rationing: who should do what?.
BMJ., 307 (1993), pp. 309-311
[9.]
A. Coulter, C. Ham.
The global challenge of health care rationing.
Open University Press, (2000),
[10.]
P. Dolan, R. Shaw, A. Tsuchiya, A. Williams.
QALY maximization and people's preferences: a methodological review of the literature.
Health Econ., 14 (2005), pp. 197-208
[11.]
National Health Committee.
Prioritising health services: a background paper for the National Health Committee.
New Zealand Minister of Health, (2004),
[12.]
L. Lindholm, M. Rosén, M. Emmelin.
An epidemiological approach towards measuring the trade-off between equity and efficiency in health policy.
Health Policy., 35 (1996), pp. 205-216
[13.]
E. Mossialos, D. King.
Citizens and rationing: analysis of a European survey.
Health Policy., 49 (1999), pp. 75-135
[14.]
V. Wiseman, G. Mooney, G. Berry, K. Tang.
Involving the general public in priority setting: experiences from Australia.
Soc Sci Med., 56 (2003), pp. 1001-1012
[15.]
World Health Organization.
Expert committee on the health education of the public.
WHO, (1954),
[16.]
World Health Organization.
Renewing the health for all strategy.
WHO, (1995),
[17.]
United Nations. Community involvement in primary health care: a study of the process of community motivation and continued participation. Report for the 1977 UNICEF-WHO Joint Committee on Health Policy, 21st. Session. Geneva: WHO; 1977.
[18.]
T. Hughes, L. Larson.
Patient involvement in health care. A procedural justice viewpoint.
Med Care., 29 (2003), pp. 297-303
[19.]
M. Mort, S. Harrison.
Healthcare users, the public and the consultation industry.
Reforming healthcare by consent: involving those who matter, pp. 107-120
[20.]
C. Charles, S. DeMaio.
Lay participation in health care decision-making: a conceptual framework.
J Health Polit Policy Law., 18 (1993), pp. 881-904
[21.]
A. Coote, J. Lenaghan.
Citizens’ juries: theory into practice.
Institute for Public Policy Research, (1996),
[22.]
J. Kneeshaw.
What does the public think about rationing? A review of the evidence.
Rationing, talk and action in health care, pp. 58-76
[23.]
L. Adams.
Healthy cities, healthy participation.
Health Educ J., 48 (1989), pp. 178-182
[24.]
Alma-Ata Declaration. The declaration of Alma-Ata. Word Health 1988, Aug-Sep, 16-17, 1978.
[25.]
S. Verba, K. Schlozman, H. Brady.
Voice and equality: civic voluntarism in American politics.
Harvard University Press, (1995),
[26.]
L. Fleck.
Just health care rationing: a democratic decision making approach.
Univ PA Law Rev, 140 (1992), pp. 1597-1636
[27.]
N. Daniels, J. Sabin.
Limits to health care: fair procedures, democratic deliberation and the legitimacy problem of insurers.
Philos Public Aff., 26 (1997), pp. 303-350
[28.]
D. Eddy.
Clinical decision-making: from theory to practice. The individual vs society. Resolving the conflict.
JAMA., 265 (1991), pp. 2399-2401
[29.]
L. Fleck.
Healthcare justice and rational democratic deliberation.
Am J Bioeth., 1 (2001), pp. 20-21
[30.]
A. Bowling, B. Jacobson, L. Southgate.
Explorations in consultation of the public and health professionals in priority setting in an inner London health district.
Soc Sci Med., 37 (1993), pp. 851-857
[31.]
M. Myllykangas, O. Ryynanen, J. Kinnunen, J. Takala.
Comparison of doctors’, nurses’, politicians’ and public attitudes to health care priorities.
J Health Serv Res Policy., 1 (1996), pp. 212-216
[32.]
G. Silver.
Community participation and health resource allocation.
Int J Health Serv., 3 (1973), pp. 117-131
[33.]
A. Maynard.
Rationing health care: an exploration.
Health Policy., 49 (1999), pp. 5-11
[34.]
T. Sheldon.
Drug company fined for excessive hospitality.
BMJ., 322 (2001), pp. 382
[35.]
D. Mechanic.
Dilemmas in rationing health care services: the case for implicit rationing.
BMJ., 310 (1995), pp. 1655-1659
[36.]
B. New.
The rationing agenda in the NHS. Rationing Agenda Group.
BMJ., 312 (1996), pp. 1591-1593
[37.]
G. Calabresi, P. Bobbitt.
Tragic choices.
Norton, (1978),
[38.]
E. Grimley.
Health care rationing and elderly people.
Rationing of health care in medicine, pp. 43-52
[39.]
B. Jacobson, A. Bowling.
Involving the public: practical and ethical issues.
Br Med Bull., 51 (1995), pp. 869-875
[40.]
J. Coast.
Citizens, their agents and health care rationing: an exploratory study using qualitative methods.
Health Econ., 10 (2001), pp. 159-174
[41.]
G. Loomes, R. Sugden.
Regret theory: an alternative theory of rationing choice under uncertainty.
Econ J., 92 (1982), pp. 805-824
[42.]
M. Ryan.
Valuing psychological factors in the provision of assisted reproductive techniques using the economic instrument of willingness to pay.
J Econ Psychol., 19 (1998), pp. 179-204
[43.]
J. Coast, R. Smith.
Non-systematic rationing: utility of ignorance.
IHEA International Congress on Health Economics, Vancouver, Canada,
[44.]
J. Abelson, J. Lomas, J. Eyles, S. Birch, G. Veenstra.
Does the community want devolved authority? Results from deliberative polling.
CMAJ., 153 (1995), pp. 403-412
[45.]
A. Bowling.
Health care rationing: the public's debate.
Br Med J., 312 (1996), pp. 670-674
[46.]
J. Dixon, H. Welch.
Priority setting: lessons from Oregon.
Lancet., 337 (1991), pp. 891-894
[47.]
Committee Choices in Health Care. Report and recommendations to the Government, November 14: The Netherlands; 1991.
[48.]
Health Committee. Report on priority setting in the NHS: purchasing House of Commons, session 1994–1995. Vol. 1. HMSO: London, HC 134–124, 1995.
[49.]
M. McKee, J. Figueras.
Setting priorities, can Britain learn from Sweden?.
BMJ., 312 (1996), pp. 691-694
[50.]
D. Chinitz, A. Israeli.
Health reform and rationing in Israel.
Health Aff (Millwood)., 16 (1997), pp. 205-210
[51.]
D. Hadorn, A. Holmes.
The New Zealand priority criteria project. Part 1: Overview.
BMJ., 314 (1997), pp. 131-134
[52.]
S. Arnstein.
A ladder of citizen participation.
J Am Inst Plann., 35 (1969), pp. 216-224
[53.]
A. Litva, J. Coast, J. Donovan, J. Eyles, M. Shepherd, J. Tacchi, et al.
The public is too subjective: public involvement at different levels of health-care decision making.
Soc Sci Med., 54 (2002), pp. 1825-1837
[54.]
P. Dolan, R. Cookson, B. Ferguson.
Effect of discussion and deliberation on the public's views of priority setting in health care: focus group study.
BMJ., 318 (1999), pp. 916-919
[55.]
A. Lloyd.
Threats to the estimation of benefit: are preference elicitation methods accurate?.
Health Econ., 12 (2003), pp. 393-402
[56.]
C. Ham.
Priority setting in health care: learning from international experience.
Health Policy., 42 (1997), pp. 49-66
[57.]
L. Sabik, R. Lie.
Priority setting in health care: lessons from the experiences of eight countries.
Int J Equity Health., 7 (2008), pp. 4
[58.]
NICE.org. [Internet]. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence; c2010 [updated 2010 December 1; cited 2010 June 9]. Available from: http://www.nice.org.uk.
[59.]
A. Wagstaff.
QALYs and the equity-efficiency trade-off.
J Health. Econ., 10 (1991), pp. 21-41
Copyright © 2010. Escola Nacional de Saúde Pública
Descargar PDF
Opciones de artículo
es en pt

¿Es usted profesional sanitario apto para prescribir o dispensar medicamentos?

Are you a health professional able to prescribe or dispense drugs?

Você é um profissional de saúde habilitado a prescrever ou dispensar medicamentos