The acceptance of priority criteria in health care: international evidence

Ahlert, Marlies and Pfarr, Christian (2015): The acceptance of priority criteria in health care: international evidence.

Abstract

Social health care systems around the world are inevitably confronted with the scarcity of resources and the resulting distributional challenges. Prioritization is applied in almost all countries, implicitly or explicitly, and shapes access to health services. We analyze and compare attitudes towards prioritization of medical treatments in a group of countries. The focus is on the criteria of age, the fact that a patient has or does not have young children or the fact that a patient is a strong smoker or a non-smoker. We use representative data from the International Social Survey Program (ISSP) of the year 2011 for nine countries (DE, US, GB, CH, NL, SE, NO, DK, AU). The empirical analysis reveals strong effects of socio-demographic factors and attitudes towards aspects of the health care system on individual’s acceptance of priority criteria. Among countries, Germans exhibit the highest aversion against priority setting whereas individuals from the US or GB are more in favor to prioritize according to the criteria smoking and age. However, a priority for patients with young children only receives support in Switzerland. Finally, we find evidence of egoistic motives for respondents’ acceptance of priority criteria.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: health care priority setting; cultural values
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement; D - Microeconomics > D7 - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making > D71 - Social Choice ; Clubs ; Committees ; Associations; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I14 - Health and Inequality; I - Health, Education, and Welfare > I1 - Health > I18 - Government Policy ; Regulation ; Public Health

References

Ahlert, M. and Pfarr, C. (2015), Attitudes of Germans towards distributive issues in the German health system, in: The European Journal of Health Economics, [online first: 10.1007/s10198-015-0693-x].

AIHW - Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (2015), National health priority areas.

Alvarez, B. and Rodríguez-Míguez, E. (2011), Patients' self-interested preferences: empirical evidence from a priority setting experiment, in: Social science & medicine (1982) 72 [8], pp. 1317–1324.

Dolan, P. and Tsuchiya, A. (2005), Health priorities and public preferences: the relative importance of past health experience and future health prospects, in: Journal of health economics 24 [4], pp. 703–714.

FOPH - Federal Office of Public Health (2013), Health 2020, The federal Council's health-policy priorities, Berne.

Hofstede, G. et al. (2010), Cultures and Organizations - Software of the Mind, intercultural cooperation and its importance for survival, McGraw-Hill Book Co., New York.

ISSP Research Group (2013), International Social Survey Programme: Health and Health Care - ISSP 2011 GESIS Data Archive, Cologne . ZA5800 Data file Version 2.0.0, doi: 10.4232/1.11759.

Maddala, G. S. (1983), Limited-dependent and qualitative variables in econometrics, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.

Müller, S. and Groß, D. (2010), Zur Akzeptanz von Leistungsbegrenzungen im Gesundheitswesen: Strategien, Kriterien und Finanzierungsmodelle unter Berücksichtigung ethischer Aspekte, in: Böcken, J., Braun, B. und Landmann, J. (Ed.), Gesundheitsmonitor 2009. Gesundheitsversorgung und Gestaltungsoptionen aus der Perspektive der Bevölkerung, Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, pp. 258–279.

Norheim, O. F. et al. (2014), Guidance on priority setting in health care (GPS-Health): the inclusion of equity criteria not captured by cost-effectiveness analysis, in: Cost Effectiveness and Resource Allocation 12 [18].

OECD (2015), OECD Health Statistics, OECD Publishing.

Olsen, J. A. (2011), Concepts of Equity and Fairness in Health and Health Care, in: Glied, S. und Smith, P. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of health economics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, pp. 814–836.

Raspe, H. and Stumpf, S. (2013), Kriterien und Verfahren zur Priorisierung medizinischer Leistungen: Ergebnisse und methodische Herausforderungen, in: Böcken, J., Braun, B. und Repschläger, U. (Ed.), Gesundheitsmonitor 2013- Bürgerorientierung im Gesund-heitswesen, Verlag Bertelsmann Stiftung, Gütersloh, pp. 186–210.

Sabik, L. M. and Lie, R. K. (2008), Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries, in: International Journal for Equity in Health 7 [4].

Schomerus, G. et al. (2006), Preferences of the public regarding cutbacks in expenditure for patient care: are there indications of discrimination against those with mental disorders?, in: Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology 41 [5], pp. 369–377.

SGB V (2015), Sozialgesetzbuch, Gesetzliche Krankenversicherung, Bd. zuletzt geändert durch Art. 2 G v. 15.04.2015, Fünftes Buch.

The WHOQOL Group (1998), The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assess-ment (WHOQOL): Development and General Psychometric Properties, in: Social Science & Medicine 46 [12], pp. 1569–1585.

The World Bank (2014), World Development Indicators, Washington.

Van Exel, J. et al. (2015), Public views on principles for health care priority setting: findings of a European cross-country study using Q methodology, in: Social science & medicine (1982) 126, pp. 128–137.

WHO (2015), Global Health Expenditure Database. WVS (2015), World Value Survey Wave 6 2010-2014, Official Aggregate v.2015041, Asep/JDS, Madrid.