De facto health-care rationing by age. The law has no remedy

AGS Position Statement: Resource Allocation Strategies and Age-Related Considerations in the COVID-19 Era and Beyond

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) continues to impact older adults disproportionately, from severe illness and hospitalization to increased mortality risk. Concurrently, concerns about potential shortages of healthcare professionals and health supplies to address these needs have focused attention on how resources are ultimately allocated and used. Some strategies misguidedly use age as an arbitrary criterion, inappropriately disfavoring older adults. This statement represents the official policy position of the American Geriatrics Society (AGS). It is intended to inform stakeholders including hospitals, health systems, and policymakers about ethical considerations to consider when developing strategies for allocating scarce resources during an emergency involving older adults. Members of the AGS Ethics Committee collaborated with interprofessional experts in ethics, law, nursing, and medicine (including geriatrics, palliative care, emergency medicine, and pulmonology/critical care) to conduct a structured literature review and examine relevant reports. The resulting recommendations defend a particular view of distributive justice that maximizes relevant clinical factors and deemphasizes or eliminates factors placing arbitrary, disproportionate weight on advanced age. The AGS positions include (1) avoiding age per se as a means for excluding anyone from care; (2) assessing comorbidities and considering the disparate impact of social determinants of health; (3) encouraging decision makers to focus primarily on potential short-term (not long-term) outcomes; (4) avoiding ancillary criteria such as "life-years saved" and "long-term predicted life expectancy" that might disadvantage older people; (5) forming and staffing triage committees tasked with allocating scarce resources; (6) developing institutional resource allocation strategies that are transparent and applied uniformly; and (7) facilitating appropriate advance care planning. The statement includes recommendations that should be immediately implemented to address resource allocation strategies during COVID-19, aligning with AGS positions. The statement also includes recommendations for post-pandemic review. Such review would support revised strategies to ensure that governments and institutions have equitable emergency resource allocation strategies, avoid future discriminatory language and practice, and have appropriate guidance to develop national frameworks for emergent resource allocation decisions. J Am Geriatr Soc 68:1136-1142, 2020.

Opening the Black Box of Rationing Care in Later Life

Research on the rationing of care to older patients in Britain and America typically focuses on acute care here I consider `chronic care'as illustrated by `community care' in Britain. Adopting a critical sociological approach to dependency and to the construction of `later life,'I argue that chronic care users constitute a class, and that clinical need has played a pivotal role in its development. As this reflects the allocative rationing of care I call into question, the claim made by the current British government that need can provide a benchmark of age justice.

[Ethics and monetary values. Influence of economical aspects on decision-making in intensive care]

Healthcare expenditure continues to grow and the demand for cost-cutting measures has increased. Critical care medicine is characterized by extremely high expenditure and thus appears to be a suitable candidate for rationing. Based on the hospital address book of Germany, a questionnaire consisting of 25 multiple choice questions was sent out to 1,000 intensive care units (ICU). The questionnaire was focused on obtaining information on whether and how rationing takes place in Germany. A total of 540 questionnaires were returned and analyzed. Only approximately 25% of intensive care units stated that a special budget is available. Approximately 59% answered that therapeutic decisions were never or rarely influenced by economic reasons, but in 9% economics often influenced decisions. Advanced age was not considered to be a reason to limit the use of extremely expensive medication or the use of renal replacement therapy (RRT) in 88% of the answers. Incurable cancer was also no reason to refuse RRT (91%). For 35% of the answers there were no contraindications for admission to intensive care, whereas for 35% an incurable disease was a contraindication, for 10% a non-resuscitation order and for 84% the patients' wishes played a decisive role. Of the intensive care units 67% were convinced that rationing is a matter of fact in ICUs in Germany and 53% were of the opinion that rationing should not occur. Of the answers 43% considered that limiting ICU therapy would be the best when rationing is necessary. Rationing therapy in critical care appears to occur daily in German ICUs. Due to the high costs, intensive care therapy will represent a very important battleground in the inevitable healthcare spending limitations of the future. Rationing cannot be determined exclusively by ICU doctors, thus clear and probably unpopular decisions on this issue are expected to be announced by the politicians.

Economic influences on end-of-life care: empirical evidence and ethical speculation

Although very little actual evidence on the issue is available, much ethical speculation has been voiced about the probable impact of the current cost containment-oriented economic climate in the United States on decisions that are being made and implemented in the context of end-of-life medical care. This article, after noting that numerous factors besides money drive the behavior of various actors in the health care system, turns to the economic influences on care for dying patients. These influences, both real and imagined, may be manifested in the amount of de facto health care rationing by age that occurs, the prevalent fears of older persons regarding both overtreatment and undertreament, the financial expectations as well as disappointments emanating from the practice of advance medical planning, and the paucity of options from which many impoverished individuals must choose at the end of their lives. It is too early to judge specifically the impact of managed care on end-of-life decisions, but positive opportunities as well as perils may materialize.