医生是资源管理者?将高价值、有成本意识的护理转化为咨询室。

IF 1.8 3区 哲学 Q2 ETHICS
Marjolein Moleman, Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Marianne Lageweg, Gianni L van den Braak, Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar
{"title":"医生是资源管理者?将高价值、有成本意识的护理转化为咨询室。","authors":"Marjolein Moleman,&nbsp;Teun Zuiderent-Jerak,&nbsp;Marianne Lageweg,&nbsp;Gianni L van den Braak,&nbsp;Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar","doi":"10.1007/s10728-022-00446-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>After many policy attempts to tackle the persistent rise in the costs of health care, physicians are increasingly seen as potentially effective resource stewards. Frameworks including the quadruple aim, value-based health care and choosing wisely underline the importance of positive engagement of the health care workforce in reinventing the system-paving the way to real affordability by defining the right care. Current programmes focus on educating future doctors to provide 'high-value, cost-conscious care' (HVCCC), which proponents believe is the future of sustainable medical practice. Such programmes, which aim to extend population-level allocation concerns to interactions between an individual doctor and patient, have generated lively debates about the ethics of expanding doctors' professional accountability. To empirically ground this discussion, we conducted a qualitative interview study to examine what happens when resource stewardship responsibilities are extended to the consulting room. Attempts to deliver HVCCC were found to involve inevitable trade-offs between benefits to the individual patient and (social) costs, medical uncertainty and efficiency, and between resource stewardship and trust. Physicians reconcile this by justifying good-value care in terms of what is in the best interest of individual patients-redefining the currency of value from monetary costs to a patient's quality of life, and cost-conscious care as reflective medical practice. Micro-level resource stewardship thus becomes a matter of working reflexively and reducing wasteful forms of care, rather than of making difficult choices about resource allocation.</p>","PeriodicalId":46740,"journal":{"name":"Health Care Analysis","volume":"30 3-4","pages":"215-239"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9741564/pdf/","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.\",\"authors\":\"Marjolein Moleman,&nbsp;Teun Zuiderent-Jerak,&nbsp;Marianne Lageweg,&nbsp;Gianni L van den Braak,&nbsp;Tjerk Jan Schuitmaker-Warnaar\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10728-022-00446-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>After many policy attempts to tackle the persistent rise in the costs of health care, physicians are increasingly seen as potentially effective resource stewards. Frameworks including the quadruple aim, value-based health care and choosing wisely underline the importance of positive engagement of the health care workforce in reinventing the system-paving the way to real affordability by defining the right care. Current programmes focus on educating future doctors to provide 'high-value, cost-conscious care' (HVCCC), which proponents believe is the future of sustainable medical practice. Such programmes, which aim to extend population-level allocation concerns to interactions between an individual doctor and patient, have generated lively debates about the ethics of expanding doctors' professional accountability. To empirically ground this discussion, we conducted a qualitative interview study to examine what happens when resource stewardship responsibilities are extended to the consulting room. Attempts to deliver HVCCC were found to involve inevitable trade-offs between benefits to the individual patient and (social) costs, medical uncertainty and efficiency, and between resource stewardship and trust. Physicians reconcile this by justifying good-value care in terms of what is in the best interest of individual patients-redefining the currency of value from monetary costs to a patient's quality of life, and cost-conscious care as reflective medical practice. Micro-level resource stewardship thus becomes a matter of working reflexively and reducing wasteful forms of care, rather than of making difficult choices about resource allocation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"volume\":\"30 3-4\",\"pages\":\"215-239\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9741564/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health Care Analysis\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-022-00446-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Care Analysis","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10728-022-00446-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

摘要

在多次尝试解决医疗费用持续上涨的政策之后,医生越来越被视为潜在有效的资源管理者。包括“四重目标”、“以价值为基础的卫生保健”和“明智选择”在内的框架强调了卫生保健工作人员积极参与重塑这一系统的重要性——通过定义正确的卫生保健为实现真正的可负担性铺平了道路。目前的项目侧重于教育未来的医生提供“高价值、有成本意识的护理”(HVCCC),支持者认为这是可持续医疗实践的未来。这些旨在将人口层面的分配问题扩展到医生和病人个体之间的互动的项目,已经引发了关于扩大医生职业责任的道德问题的激烈辩论。为了根据经验进行讨论,我们进行了定性访谈研究,以检查当资源管理责任扩展到咨询室时会发生什么。研究发现,实施HVCCC的尝试不可避免地涉及患者个人利益与(社会)成本、医疗不确定性与效率、资源管理与信任之间的权衡。为了调和这一点,医生们从病人个人的最大利益出发,为高价值的医疗服务辩护——重新定义价值的货币,从金钱成本到病人的生活质量,以及作为反思医疗实践的成本意识的医疗服务。因此,微观层面的资源管理变成了一种反射性的工作和减少浪费的护理形式,而不是对资源分配做出艰难的选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.

Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.

Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.

Doctors as Resource Stewards? Translating High-Value, Cost-Conscious Care to the Consulting Room.

After many policy attempts to tackle the persistent rise in the costs of health care, physicians are increasingly seen as potentially effective resource stewards. Frameworks including the quadruple aim, value-based health care and choosing wisely underline the importance of positive engagement of the health care workforce in reinventing the system-paving the way to real affordability by defining the right care. Current programmes focus on educating future doctors to provide 'high-value, cost-conscious care' (HVCCC), which proponents believe is the future of sustainable medical practice. Such programmes, which aim to extend population-level allocation concerns to interactions between an individual doctor and patient, have generated lively debates about the ethics of expanding doctors' professional accountability. To empirically ground this discussion, we conducted a qualitative interview study to examine what happens when resource stewardship responsibilities are extended to the consulting room. Attempts to deliver HVCCC were found to involve inevitable trade-offs between benefits to the individual patient and (social) costs, medical uncertainty and efficiency, and between resource stewardship and trust. Physicians reconcile this by justifying good-value care in terms of what is in the best interest of individual patients-redefining the currency of value from monetary costs to a patient's quality of life, and cost-conscious care as reflective medical practice. Micro-level resource stewardship thus becomes a matter of working reflexively and reducing wasteful forms of care, rather than of making difficult choices about resource allocation.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
3
期刊介绍: Health Care Analysis is a journal that promotes dialogue and debate about conceptual and normative issues related to health and health care, including health systems, healthcare provision, health law, public policy and health, professional health practice, health services organization and decision-making, and health-related education at all levels of clinical medicine, public health and global health. Health Care Analysis seeks to support the conversation between philosophy and policy, in particular illustrating the importance of conceptual and normative analysis to health policy, practice and research. As such, papers accepted for publication are likely to analyse philosophical questions related to health, health care or health policy that focus on one or more of the following: aims or ends, theories, frameworks, concepts, principles, values or ideology. All styles of theoretical analysis are welcome providing that they illuminate conceptual or normative issues and encourage debate between those interested in health, philosophy and policy. Papers must be rigorous, but should strive for accessibility – with care being taken to ensure that their arguments and implications are plain to a broad academic and international audience. In addition to purely theoretical papers, papers grounded in empirical research or case-studies are very welcome so long as they explore the conceptual or normative implications of such work. Authors are encouraged, where possible, to have regard to the social contexts of the issues they are discussing, and all authors should ensure that they indicate the ‘real world’ implications of their work. Health Care Analysis publishes contributions from philosophers, lawyers, social scientists, healthcare educators, healthcare professionals and administrators, and other health-related academics and policy analysts.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信