liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Withholding and withdrawing treatment for cost-effectiveness reasons: Are they ethically on par?
Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för medicin och hälsa, Avdelningen för hälso- och sjukvårdsanalys. Linköpings universitet, Medicinska fakulteten.ORCID-id: 0000-0003-0987-7653
Linköpings universitet.
2019 (engelsk)Inngår i: Bioethics, ISSN 0269-9702, E-ISSN 1467-8519, Vol. 33, nr 2, s. 278-286Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

In healthcare priority settings, early access to treatment before reimbursement decisions gives rise to problems of whether negative decisions for cost-effectiveness reasons should result in withdrawing treatment, already accessed by patients. Among professionals there seems to be a strong attitude to distinguish between withdrawing and withholding treatment, viewing the former as ethically worse. In this article the distinction between withdrawing and withholding treatment for reasons of cost effectiveness is explored by analysing the doing/allowing distinction, different theories of justice, consequentialist and virtue perspectives. The authors do not find any strong reasons for an intrinsic difference, but do find some reasons for a consequentialist difference, given present attitudes. However, overall, such a difference does not, all things considered, provide a convincing reason against withdrawal, given the greater consequentialist gain of using cost-effective treatment. As a result, patients should be properly informed when given early access to treatment, that such treatment can be later withdrawn following a negative reimbursement decision.

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Inc., 2019. Vol. 33, nr 2, s. 278-286
Emneord [en]
cost effectiveness; equivalence thesis; priority setting; withdrawing; withholding
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-154575DOI: 10.1111/bioe.12545ISI: 000457454400011PubMedID: 30536795Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85058386317OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-154575DiVA, id: diva2:1290494
Tilgjengelig fra: 2019-02-20 Laget: 2019-02-20 Sist oppdatert: 2019-06-27bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstPubMedScopus

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Sandman, LarsLiliemark, Jan
Av organisasjonen
I samme tidsskrift
Bioethics

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Totalt: 63 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf