Literature DB >> 19838664

[Equal access to medical services over the lifespan].

J Fritze1.   

Abstract

Demand for health services is in principle unlimited, in contrast to resources. People covered by public health funds in principle have equal access to treatment according to the highest level of medical evidence available. In order to restrict expenditure the legislator stipulates different instruments. These include reference pricing for generics as well as price capping. The legislator still shies from price fixing which is well established in other states. Instead, office-based physicians are confronted by law with rationing decisions concerning their own services as well as services prescribed where the mentally ill are at special risk of becoming victims of intransparency, as exemplified by the heterogeneity of the prescription of psychotropic drugs. A systematic prioritization approach following internationally available models might open new perspectives.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19838664     DOI: 10.1007/s00115-009-2808-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nervenarzt        ISSN: 0028-2804            Impact factor:   1.214


  3 in total

1.  Ethics and opportunity costs: have NICE grasped the ethics of priority setting?

Authors:  J McMillan; M Sheehan; D Austin; J Howell
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 2.903

2.  Prioritising health services in an era of limits: the Oregon experience.

Authors:  J A Kitzhaber
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-08-07

3.  Compression, expansion, or dynamic equilibrium? The evolution of health expectancy in New Zealand.

Authors:  Patrick Graham; Tony Blakely; Peter Davis; Andrew Sporle; Neil Pearce
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 3.710

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.