LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Hauck, K.; Shaw, R.; Smith, P.C. (2002)
Publisher: John Wiley & Sons
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: RA, HG
Identifiers:doi:10.1002/hec.692
Traditionally, most health care systems which pretend to any sort of rationality and cost control have sought to allocate their limited funds in order to secure equal opportunity of access for equal need. The UK government is implementing a fundamental change of resource allocation philosophy towards contributing to the reduction of avoidable health inequalities. The purpose of this essay is to explore some of the economic issues that arise when seeking to allocate health care resources according to the new criterion. It indicates that health inequalities might arise because of variations in the quality of health services, variations in access to those services, or variations in the way people produce health, and that the resource allocation consequences differ depending on which source is being addressed. The paper shows that an objective of reducing health inequalities is not necessarily compatible with an objective of equity of access, nor with the objective of maximising health gain. The results have profound consequences for approaches towards economic evaluation, the role of clinical guidelines and performance management, as well as for resource allocation methods.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • 1. Rice N, Smith, P. Capitation and risk adjustment in health care financing: an international progress report. The Milbank Quarterly, 2001; 79: 81-113.
    • 2. Resource Allocation Working Party. Sharing Resources for Health in England. HMSO: London, 1976.
    • 3. Royston GHD, Hurst JW, Lister EG, Stewart PA. Modelling the use of health services by populations of small areas to inform the allocation of central resources to larger regions. Socio-Econ Plann Sci 1992; 26: 169-180.
    • 4. Smith P, Rice N, Carr-Hill R. Capitation funding in the public sector. J Roy Statist Soc Ser A, 2001; 164: 217-257.
    • 5. Carr-Hill RA, Sheldon TA, Smith P, Martin S, Peacock S, Hardman G. Allocating resources to health authorities: development of methods for small area analysis of use of inpatient services. British Med J 1994; 309: 1046-1049.
    • 6. Welsh Office. NHS Resource Allocation Review: Emerging Findings Report to the Health and Social Services Committee. Welsh Office: Cardiff; 2001.
    • 7. Department of Health and Social Services. Allocating Resources to H&SS Boards: Proposed Changes to the Weighted Capitat Formulae - A Third Report from the Capitation Formula Review Group. Department of Health and Social Services: Belfast; 2001.
    • 8. Scottish Executive Health Department. Fair Shares for All: Final Report. Scottish Executive Health Department: Edinburgh; 2000.
    • 9. Ha.kkinen U, Mikkola HM, Nordberg M, Salonen M. Tutkimus Kuntien Terveyspalveluiden Valtionosuuksien Perusteista [A Study on the Foundations of the State Subsidies for Municipal Health Services]. Sisa.asiainministeri o.: Helsinki; 1996.
    • 10. Pampalon, R. L'approche que!be!coise en matie"re d'indicateurs de besoins pour l'allocation re!gionale des ressources, in CREDES. In Allocations des Ressources, Ge!ographie des Soins. CREDES: Paris; 1998.
    • 11. Culyer AJ. Need - the idea won't do - but we still need it. Social Sci Med 1995; 40: 727-730.
    • 12. Acheson D. Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health. HMSO: London, 1998.
    • 13. Department of Health. Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation. The Stationery Office: London, 1999.
    • 14. Culyer AJ. Health, health expenditures and equity. In Equity in the Finance and Delivery of Health Care: An International Perspective, Doorslaer EV, Wagstaff A, Rutten F. (eds). Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1993.
    • 15. Department of Health and Social Security. Sharing Resources for Health in England: Report of the Resource Allocation Working Party. HMSO: London, 1976.
    • 16. Whynes D, Heron T, Avery A. Prescribing cost savings by GP fundholders: long term or short term? Health Econom, 1997; 8: 335-343.
    • 17. Shmueli A, Glazer J. Addressing the inequity of capitation by variable soft contracts. Health Econ 1999; 8: 335-343.
    • 18. Croxson B, Propper C, Perkins A. Do doctors respond to financial incentives? UK family doctors and the GP fundholding scheme. J Public Econ 2001; 79: 375-398.
    • 19. Department of Health. The NHS Plan: A Plan for Investment, A Plan for Reform. The Stationery Office: London, 2000.
    • 20. Goddard M, Smith P. Equity of Access to Health Care. Centre for Health Economics, University of York: York, 1998.
    • 21. Gordon D, Shaw M, Dorling D, Davey-Smith G. Inequalities in Health: the Evidence Presented to the Independent Inquiry into Inequalities in Health, chaired by Sir Donald Acheson. The Policy Press: Bristol, 1999.
    • 22. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Review of Research on the Effectiveness of Health Service Interventions to Reduce Variations in Health. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination: York, 1995.
    • 23. Sutton M, Lock P. Regional differences in health care delivery: implications for a national resource allocation formula. Health Econ 2000; 9: 547-559.
    • 24. Williams A. Beyond effectiveness and efficiency lies equality!. In Non-random Reflections on Health Services Research, Maynard A, Chalmers I. (eds). BMJ Publishing Group: London, 1997.
    • 25. Wagstaff A. QALYs and the equity-efficiency tradeoff. J Health Econ 1991; 10: 21-41.
    • 26. Williams A, Cookson R. Equity in health. In Handbook of Health Econom, Culyer AJ, Newhouse J (eds). Elsevier: Amsterdam, 2000.
    • 27. Pereira J. What Does Equity in Health Mean? Discussion Paper 61. Centre for Health Economics: University of York, 1989.
    • 28. Culyer AJ, Wagstaff A. Equity and equality in health and health care. J Health Econ 1993; 12: 431- 437.
    • 29. Mooney G. And now for vertical equity? Some concerns arising from aboriginal health in Australia. Health Econ 1996; 5: 99-103.
    • 30. Lindholm L, Rosen M, Emmelin M. How many lives is equity worth? A proposal for equity adjusted years of life saved. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998; 52: 808-811.
    • 31. Andersson F, Lyttkens CH. Preferences for equity in health behind a veil of ignorance. Health Econ 1999; 8: 369-378.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article