liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
To accept, or not to accept, that is the question: citizen reactions to rationing
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. (The National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care)
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Health Care Analysis. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences. (The National Centre for Priority Setting in Health Care)
2014 (English)In: Health Expectations, ISSN 1369-6513, E-ISSN 1369-7625, Vol. 17, no 1, p. 82-92Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background  The publicly financed health service in Sweden has come under increasing pressure, forcing policy makers to consider restrictions. Objective  To describe different perceptions of rationing, in particular, what citizens themselves believe influences their acceptance of having to stand aside for others in a public health service. Design  Qualitative interviews, analysed by phenomenography, describing perceptions by different categories. Setting and participants  Purposeful sample of 14 Swedish citizens, based on demographic criteria and attitudes towards allocation in health care. Results  Participants expressed high awareness of limitations in public resources and the necessity of rationing. Acceptance of rationing could increase or decrease, depending on one's (i) awareness that healthcare resources are limited, (ii) endorsement of universal health care, (iii) knowledge and acceptance of the principles guiding rationing and (iv) knowledge about alternatives to public health services. Conclusions  This study suggests that decision makers should be more explicit in describing the dilemma of resource limitations in a publicly funded healthcare system. Openness enables citizens to gain the insight to make informed decisions, i.e. to use public services or to 'opt out' of the public sector solution if they consider rationing decisions unacceptable.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
John Wiley & Sons, 2014. Vol. 17, no 1, p. 82-92
Keyword [en]
citizen perspective, phenomenography, priority setting, rationing, Sweden
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-104308DOI: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00734.xISI: 000330647300010PubMedID: 22032636OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-104308DiVA, id: diva2:696571
Available from: 2014-02-14 Created: 2014-02-14 Last updated: 2018-04-03
In thesis
1. Asking the public: Citizens´ views on priority setting and resource allocation in democratically governed healthcare
Open this publication in new window or tab >>Asking the public: Citizens´ views on priority setting and resource allocation in democratically governed healthcare
2018 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

Resource allocation in publicly funded healthcare systems is inevitably linked with priority setting between different patient groups and between different service areas, so-called meso level priorities. Behind every priority-setting decision (investments, reallocating or rationing), are values affecting both the content of the decisions and how the decisions are made. The importance for priority-setting to reflect social values, has been emphasised for the legitimacy of the healthcare systems and the decision makers. Also important, if supposed to provide enough guidance in practice, is that content values, expressed in ethical principles and criteria, are further operationalised. Few studies exist where Swedish citizens have been asked about priority setting and rationing at meso level, and findings from other countries cannot automatically be transferred to the Swedish context.

The overall aim of this thesis is to extend and deepen the knowledge of the Swedish citizens´ views on acceptance of rationing in healthcare, on appropriate decision makers for rationing, and on the severity criterion for priority setting. Two qualitative and one mixmethod study were conducted, where citizens were interviewed. Citizens´ views on severity were also compared, both with a Severity Framework, derived from parliamentary-decided ethical principles and used for resource allocation, and with health professionals´ and politicians´ ranking of different aspects of severity in a quantitative, survey study.

Study I shows that citizen participants perceived that acceptance of rationing at meso level is built on the awareness of priority-setting dilemmas between patient groups. No such spontaneous awareness was found. Depending on reactions of self-interest or solidarity, acceptance was also perceived to be built on acceptable principles for rationing and/or access to alternatives to public care. Study II shows that awareness of the meso level forms the basis for awareness of different risks of unfairness, linked with potential decision makers (even health professionals). Collaborative arrangements were promoted in order to control for such risks, especially the risk of self-interest. Politicians, in contrast to previous studies, were favoured as final decision makers for rationing healthcare. In study III, citizen participants identified the same severity aspects as health professionals and experts had done in the Severity Framework. They contributed with some possible refinements, but also promoted aspects not in line with established ethical criteria for priority setting in Sweden. Study IV shows that citizen respondents differ to a larger proportion compared to politicians´ ranking of severity aspects, than with that of health professionals´. The greatest number of significant differences was found between politicians and health professionals.

This thesis has several implications. Politicians ought to strive for greater public awareness of the priority-setting dilemma at the meso level in healthcare, both according to the process and the content values behind the decisions. Social values not in accordance to the parliamentary decision indicate a need to facilitate an ongoing dialogue, reason-giving activities and promotion of content values of solidarity. To capture social values on priority setting and rationing, ambitious public deliberation is not the only way. Methodologically stringent research, with a variety of study designs, could contribute in many important ways.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköping University Electronic Press, 2018. p. 138
Series
Linköping University Medical Dissertations, ISSN 0345-0082 ; 1587
National Category
Health Care Service and Management, Health Policy and Services and Health Economy Medical Ethics Public Administration Studies Social Sciences Interdisciplinary
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-146217 (URN)10.3384/diss.diva-146217 (DOI)9789176854518 (ISBN)
Public defence
2018-04-20, Hasselquistsalen, Campus US, Linköping, 13:00 (Swedish)
Opponent
Supervisors
Available from: 2018-04-03 Created: 2018-04-03 Last updated: 2018-05-14Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(646 kB)187 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 646 kBChecksum SHA-512
ed4862af63eb9a146a628452687f360acc6c0b0c9c2bfb61802ce8e52f3bad14ae197f0768c4dc5b911994cc7a9b5b73946299300a90c09de49e451dc2a2a5c2
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Broqvist, MariGarpenby, Peter

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Broqvist, MariGarpenby, Peter
By organisation
Division of Health Care AnalysisFaculty of Health Sciences
In the same journal
Health Expectations
Medical and Health Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 187 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 202 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf