The Role of Physicians in the Allocation of Health Care: Is Some Justice Better than None?

Physicians' advocacy obligations are best understood as going beyond advocacy on behalf of individual patients, which I call the "individualistic view," to include advocacy for intelligent research-based allocation schemes that promote good outcomes and cost-effective care for all patients, which I call the "systemic view." This systemic view includes moving beyond self-interest to promote less-wasteful and more cost-conscious allocation decisions and the setting of priorities at all levels to expand health care access. It includes physician involvement in discussions with patients in the context of clinical care, involvement in the formulation and administration of benefit structures and other allocation policies, and, finally, involvement in promoting public dialogue about health care priorities. This involvement is based on a concept of a deliberative process that can result in "just enough" decisions within systems for the preservation and promotion of health care and other societal goods.

Health insurance benefit design and healthcare utilization in northern rural China

BACKGROUND

Poverty due to illness has become a substantial social problem in rural China since the collapse of the rural Cooperative Medical System in the early 1980s. Although the Chinese government introduced the New Rural Cooperative Medical Schemes (NRCMS) in 2003, the associations between different health insurance benefit package designs and healthcare utilization remain largely unknown. Accordingly, we sought to examine the impact of health insurance benefit design on health care utilization.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

We conducted a cross-sectional study using data from a household survey of 15,698 members of 4,209 randomly-selected households in 7 provinces, which were representative of the provinces along the north side of the Yellow River. Interviews were conducted face-to-face and in Mandarin. Our analytic sample included 9,762 respondents from 2,642 households. In each household, respondents indicated the type of health insurance benefit that the household had (coverage for inpatient care only or coverage for both inpatient and outpatient care) and the number of outpatient visits in the 30 days preceding the interview and the number of hospitalizations in the 365 days preceding the household interview. People who had both outpatient and inpatient coverage compared with inpatient coverage only had significantly more village-level outpatient visits, township-level outpatient visits, and total outpatient visits. Furthermore, the increased utilization of township and village-level outpatient care was experienced disproportionately by people who were poorer, whereas the increased inpatient utilization overall and at the county level was experienced disproportionately by people who were richer.

CONCLUSION

The evidence from this study indicates that the design of health insurance benefits is an important policy tool that can affect the health services utilization and socioeconomic equity in service use at different levels. Without careful design, health insurance may not benefit those who are most in need of financial protection from health services expenses.

QALYs: is the value of treatment proportional to the size of the health gain?

In societal priority setting between health programs for different patient groups, many people are reluctant to discriminate too strongly between those who can benefit much from treatment and those who can benefit moderately. We suggest that this view of distributive fairness has a counterpart in personal valuations of gains in health. Such valuations may be influenced by psychological reference points and diminishing marginal utility such that the individual utility of care in patient groups with different potentials may be more similar than what conventional QALY estimates suggest. In interviews in three convenience samples, there is some support for the hypothesis. Most respondents do not think that desire for treatment is significantly less in those who stand to gain only moderately compared with those who stand to gain much - even when the treatment is associated with a mortality risk. When stating insurance preferences, a majority of subjects express a greater concern for avoiding the worst states in question than for maximising expected value for money in terms of treatment effects. The tendency applies to outcomes in terms of both quality and quantity of life. Choices between prefixed response options fit well with oral explanations of these choices.

The transformation of morals in markets: death, benefits, and the exchange of life insurance policies

This article adopts an institutional approach to describe the changing secondary market for life insurance in the United States. Since the 1990s, this market, in which investors buy strangers' life insurance policies, has grown in the face of considerable moral ambivalence. The author uses news reports and interviews to identify and describe three conceptions of this market: sacred revulsion, consumerist consolation, and rationalized reconciliation. Differences among the conceptions are considered in view of the institutional legacy of life insurance and its success in organizing practices, perceptions, and understandings about markets and death. From this case, the author draws implications for analyses of morals in markets, an important and emergent topic within economic sociology.

Confronting Trade-Offs In Health Care: Harvard Pilgrim Health Care’s Organizational Ethics Program

Patients, providers, and policy leaders need a new moral compass to guide them in the turbulent U.S. health care system. Task forces have proposed excellent ethical codes, but these have been seen as too abstract to provide guidance at the front lines. Harvard Pilgrim Health Care's ten-year experience with an organizational ethics program suggests ways in which health care organizations can strengthen transparency, consumer focus, and overall ethical performance and contribute to the national health policy dialogue.

Improving fairness in coverage decisions: performance expectations for quality improvement

Patients and physicians often perceive the current health care system to be unfair, in part because of the ways in which coverage decisions appear to be made. To address this problem the Ethical Force Program, a collaborative effort to create quality improvement tools for ethics in health care, has developed five content areas specifying ethical criteria for fair health care benefits design and administration. Each content area includes concrete recommendations and measurable expectations for performance improvement, which can be used by those organizations involved in the design and administration of health benefits packages, such as purchasers, health plans, benefits consultants, and practitioner groups.