[Patient management and patient autonomy: An ethical tension?]

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Aline Weis, Andreas Bruns, Julia Sanchez, Eva C Winkler
{"title":"[Patient management and patient autonomy: An ethical tension?]","authors":"Aline Weis, Andreas Bruns, Julia Sanchez, Eva C Winkler","doi":"10.1007/s00103-026-04300-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the context of current debates in health policy, patient management is increasingly being discussed in the German healthcare system. These measures aim to coordinate access to care, reduce both inappropriate and over-provision of care, and guide patients through a complex healthcare system according to their needs. Critics, however, see this as a violation of patient autonomy and free choice.This article examines whether, and if so, to what extent, there is a conflict between patient management and autonomy. The starting point is an analysis of whether and to what extent patient management conflicts with the principle of autonomy. This analysis is based on an understanding of autonomy that encompasses not only the absence of coercion or restrictions on freedom of choice, but also the ability to make well-considered decisions through appropriate information and support.The article demonstrates that management mechanisms are not necessarily at odds with autonomy. Rather, they can structure decision-making spaces, improve orientation, and thus support autonomous decision-making. This is supported by empirical findings that show that formal freedom of choice alone does not guarantee that patients access care in an informed and self-determined way. Instead, structuring instruments are frequently perceived as helpful support.The article then formulates three key criteria for the ethical evaluation of patient management. First, it must be examined whether management mechanisms enable or effectively prevent patients from making preference- and value-based decisions. Second, their contribution to the quality of care is crucial: control is ethically justifiable if it promotes evidence-based and coordinated care without worsening patient outcomes. Third, its significance for justice and fair resource allocation must be considered. In a solidarity-based healthcare system, patient management can be legitimate if it serves to allocate limited resources in a transparent, needs-based, and accountable manner. If these criteria are met, patient management does not conflict with the principle of respect for patient autonomy; rather, in the best-case scenario, it promotes it.</p>","PeriodicalId":9562,"journal":{"name":"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz","volume":" ","pages":"1221-1227"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13624046/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-026-04300-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/9/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the context of current debates in health policy, patient management is increasingly being discussed in the German healthcare system. These measures aim to coordinate access to care, reduce both inappropriate and over-provision of care, and guide patients through a complex healthcare system according to their needs. Critics, however, see this as a violation of patient autonomy and free choice.This article examines whether, and if so, to what extent, there is a conflict between patient management and autonomy. The starting point is an analysis of whether and to what extent patient management conflicts with the principle of autonomy. This analysis is based on an understanding of autonomy that encompasses not only the absence of coercion or restrictions on freedom of choice, but also the ability to make well-considered decisions through appropriate information and support.The article demonstrates that management mechanisms are not necessarily at odds with autonomy. Rather, they can structure decision-making spaces, improve orientation, and thus support autonomous decision-making. This is supported by empirical findings that show that formal freedom of choice alone does not guarantee that patients access care in an informed and self-determined way. Instead, structuring instruments are frequently perceived as helpful support.The article then formulates three key criteria for the ethical evaluation of patient management. First, it must be examined whether management mechanisms enable or effectively prevent patients from making preference- and value-based decisions. Second, their contribution to the quality of care is crucial: control is ethically justifiable if it promotes evidence-based and coordinated care without worsening patient outcomes. Third, its significance for justice and fair resource allocation must be considered. In a solidarity-based healthcare system, patient management can be legitimate if it serves to allocate limited resources in a transparent, needs-based, and accountable manner. If these criteria are met, patient management does not conflict with the principle of respect for patient autonomy; rather, in the best-case scenario, it promotes it.

病人管理和病人自主:伦理矛盾?]
在当前卫生政策辩论的背景下,患者管理越来越多地被讨论在德国医疗保健系统。这些措施旨在协调获得护理的机会,减少不适当和过度提供护理,并根据患者的需要指导他们通过复杂的医疗保健系统。然而,批评者认为这是对患者自主权和自由选择的侵犯。本文探讨是否,如果是,在多大程度上,有患者管理和自主权之间的冲突。本文的出发点是分析病人管理是否和在多大程度上与自主原则相冲突。这种分析是基于对自主权的理解,它不仅包括对选择自由没有强迫或限制,而且还包括通过适当的信息和支持做出深思熟虑的决定的能力。本文表明,管理机制不一定与自治相矛盾。相反,它们可以构建决策空间,改善方向,从而支持自主决策。这得到了实证研究结果的支持,这些研究结果表明,仅靠正式的选择自由并不能保证患者以知情和自主的方式获得护理。相反,结构性工具经常被视为有益的支持。然后,文章制定了三个关键标准的伦理评价的病人管理。首先,必须检查管理机制是否能够或有效地阻止患者做出基于偏好和价值的决定。其次,他们对护理质量的贡献是至关重要的:如果控制能够促进循证和协调的护理,而不会恶化患者的预后,那么它在道德上是合理的。第三,必须考虑其对公正和公平分配资源的意义。在以团结为基础的医疗保健系统中,如果能够以透明、基于需求和负责任的方式分配有限的资源,患者管理就是合法的。如果满足这些标准,患者管理并不与尊重患者自主权的原则相冲突;相反,在最好的情况下,它会促进它。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz
Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
5.90%
发文量
145
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Die Monatszeitschrift Bundesgesundheitsblatt - Gesundheitsforschung - Gesundheitsschutz - umfasst alle Fragestellungen und Bereiche, mit denen sich das öffentliche Gesundheitswesen und die staatliche Gesundheitspolitik auseinandersetzen. Ziel ist es, zum einen über wesentliche Entwicklungen in der biologisch-medizinischen Grundlagenforschung auf dem Laufenden zu halten und zum anderen über konkrete Maßnahmen zum Gesundheitsschutz, über Konzepte der Prävention, Risikoabwehr und Gesundheitsförderung zu informieren. Wichtige Themengebiete sind die Epidemiologie übertragbarer und nicht übertragbarer Krankheiten, der umweltbezogene Gesundheitsschutz sowie gesundheitsökonomische, medizinethische und -rechtliche Fragestellungen.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书