The public preference for which group of people get priority is studied by Dolan and 11 Tsuchiya (2005). This paper conducted a questionnaire in order to get the idea about which group of people get priority from public’s perspective if the resource is limited. The authors stated this survey focused on four factors that influence the ranking by the public: age, past health, future years and future health in the absence of treatments, and in addition, this paper included two questions: the first one tried to figure out what the public will choose between risk to death and age, and the second one tried to investigate the priority between severe illness and age. For the simplification, this paper claimed that there are only two age group, 40 and …show more content…
60, and there are only two level of past health, full healthy and half healthy. In addition, for the first question, the authors stated that there are two levels of future years in the absence of treatment, 6 and 1, and the future health without treatment is the same across individuals.
However, for the second question, the paper claimed that there are two levels of future health without treatment, 60 and 10, and the future years without treatment is the same across individuals. The paper found that for both questions, people gives the priority to the young individuals, and for the first questions, the public is willing to give priority to those with poor past health. Based on the results, the authors concluded that people always think the younger individuals should get priority and individuals with poor past health should get priority if they face risk to death. The similar focus is studied by Lancsar, Wildman, Donaldson, Ryan, and Baker (2011), who derived the different weights for the QALYs. In this paper, the authors found that public want to give more weights to very young and very old individuals, since younger individuals has longer years in their future and older ones faces the risk to death. This result is consistent with Dolan and Tsuchiya (2005). In addition, the researchers in this paper suggested that the public is willing to give more weights for individuals with less severe health conditions than those who are severely sick, since ones with less …show more content…
severe health conditions are more likely to recover well than those who face severe illness. 12 Generally, there are two kinds of treatments: one with health improvement and the other with life extension.
Pinto-Prades, S ́anchez-Mart ́ınez, Corbacho, and Baker (2014) investigated the public preference for different kinds of treatment. More precisely, this research conducted three different surveys: the first one is trade-off between life expectancy gained for individuals who are at the end of life and health gains for those with temporary health problems, and the second one is trade-off between health gains with temporary health problems and increases in life quality for those who are at the end of life. In addition, the last survey focuses on the gains in life extension and life quality for those who are at the end of life. This paper stated that all surveys are conducted under the willingness- to-pay and person trade-off techniques, which gives the value of each alternative from the population of Spain. The results that this research addressed is that the public are willing to give more weights for treatments occurred at the end of life. In addition, this article suggested that the general population weight quality of life more than increases in life
expectancy. I conclude here that previous literatures discussed above suggest that there is a trade- off between equity and efficiency of health care, and there are other factors determine the distribution of QALYs besides the total numbers of QALYs gained if government wants to pursue more equally distribution of health care. One example is that past health history will determine how to distribute the QALYs. Another important thing is about the public preference of priority in terms of individuals with different characteristics. The results showed that very young and very old are more likely to get priority and individuals with poor past health are more likely to get priority if they face risk to death, and the public will weight individuals with less severe sickness more than that for those face risk to death. In addition, the public weight more weights for treatments occurred at the end of life, and the public value the life quality more than life extension. Based on previous discussion 13 about the limitations of the QALYs, I now turn to introduce some alternatives to QALYs in order to investigate whether those alternatives are better tool for decision making in health resource allocation than the QALY approach.
Pearlman, R. A. & Jonsen, A. (1985). The use of quality-of-life considerations in medical decision making. J AM Geriatr Sociology, 33(5), 344-352.
Humans are mortal beings, therefore with life comes death; this is a certainty. What is not so certain is the quality of life which one will lead thereto; and the variances they will face in life which will underwrite a person’s health. Health, which can be measured, regulates the quality and longevity of people’s lives. People have long since philosophised that it is “luck of the draw” as to who are inflicted with illness or disease. In fact, through research and consensus reports, analysis has concluded that social, economic and environmental influences are contributing factors. This essay will explore some of the main issues regarding health and consequences of lifestyle choices. Furthermore, recognition and critique will be focused on the principal reports and recommendations therein regarding health inequalities.
The University of Aukland Human Participants Ethics community did a study to find a qualitative approach to find a reasons of why older, healthier, individuals who are against the physician-assisted dying at the end of life. The method that they used is a sample selection and they did this by putting an advertisement that was seeking individuals who are against physician-assisted dying, who are the ages 65 years old or older, and lived in the Aukland. Approximately 8900 surveys went out, only 23 individuals responded to them, and out of them only 11 were selected. None of them was offered money for their participating in this study. They did interviews so that way they can get an understanding of the term euthanasia. They found if a person has experienced the dying and death of a loved one has influenced some of the participants in the terms of how their view on physician-assisted dying. The results that they found was that five individuals experienced of a good dying and death strengthen their view that hurrying up the dying process was unnecessary. Eight participants expressed
Healthy People 2020 is geared towards betterment of health for the most citizens by year 2020.It is a carefully and exhaustively planned project by the different sectors of government and health agencies with the inclusion of the analyses of the determinants of health, and disparities, using different kind of public health models in order to make appropriate policies and programs that are feasible to implement and practical to abide for the benefit of the population served.
Even in the most prosperous countries, people who are less affluent have considerably shorter life expectancies and much more sicknesses than people who are wealthy. Social determinants are considered to be the circumstances in the places where people dwell, gain knowledge of life situations, where someone’s job is, where we have fun, and age which is also included as a social determinant. These social determinants have an effect on a wide array of health risks and outcomes. “These circumstances are shaped by the distribution of money, power, and resources at global, national, and local levels, which are themselves influenced by policy choices. The social determinants of health are mostly responsible for health inequities--the unfair and avoidable
Social determinants of health has been a large topic for many years and can have a positive and negative effect on individuals, families and communities. (World Health Organisation, 2009) The social determinants of health are the conditions in which people are born, grow, live, work and age, including the health system. These circumstances are shaped by the distribution of money, power and resources at global, national and local levels, which are themselves influenced by policy choices. Social determinants have many factors and in this essay education will be the main social determinant of health discussed and how this could have an impact on the physical and mental sides of health.
Healthy People 2020 is a program for the promotion of health and the prevention of diseases, launched by the Department of Health and Human Services in December 2010. According to healthypeople.gov, this program has four overarching goals which are first to achieve healthy, longer lives free of preventable diseases, injuries, and premature deaths; to achieve health fairness, eliminate differences, and improve all groups’ health; also to produce social and physical environments that encourage good health; and last but not least to promote life’s quality, healthy development, and healthy behaviors through all life stages. This program has a vision of a community where people live long, healthy lives. Healthy People 2020 offers a comprehensive set of 10 years of nationwide goals and objectives that is meant to improve the health of the American population. Healthy People 2020 covers 42 topic areas with approximately 600 objectives, which include 1,200 measures. A smaller set of Healthy People 2020 objectives, has been designated to communicate high-priority health issues and actions that can be taken to address them, this objectives are called Leading Health Indicators. The program goes above and beyond these health indicators in order to provide the best care for the people of this country. These indictors cover from the access of health service, nutrition, physical activity, and obesity to substance abuse, environmental quality, injury and violence.
Meisel, Alan. "Quality of Life and End-of-Life Decision Making." Quality of Life Research 12 (2003): 91-94.
Significant health inequalities exist between different social classes. Moreover, lower social classes consistently describe their health as poorer in comparison to higher social classes [1]. Marmot’s central theory is that “the relationship between social circumstances and health is a graded one: the higher a person’s social position, the better his or her health” [2].
Also the essay will discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each approach as this can be an indicator if this approach is applied, whether it can address inequality and improve the health and well being of that individual or society. The essay will use the Dahlgren and Whitehead social determinants of health of need to exemplify the determinants of health showing how these determinants can influence the way health is viewed as holistic or merely an absence of disease. Lastly, the essay will analyse the evaluation with these approaches plus the importance of evaluation to present programs and future programs or activity.
The social determinants of health are both social and economic factors and conditions that influence individuals and groups in society based on their location, work, class, race, age and access to care...
The Elderly individuals face problems like Ageism. The older society is not given the same options in treatment as the younger society. The Elderly who battle cancer do not receive chemotherapy like the younger generation. Some people believe that doctors are genuinely worried about their patients and others believe that age discrimination is the reason of treatment discrepancy (Dockter & Keene, 2009).
their health as excellent, good, or very good. -Health and mobility decline with age, especially after age 80. Disease is more common among older adults. - Most of the diseases of later life have their origin years earlier. -Income is related to the perception of health.
Shaw, C., Brittain, K., Tansey, R. & Williams K. (2008) How people decide to seek health care: A qualitative study. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 45 (10), 1516-1524.
With movements made by the governments and medical professionals of developed countries in the interests of giving patients more choice, the definition of “healthy,” especially in contemporary society, has become subjective (Freemantle and Hill 2002, Armstrong 1995, Bury 2008, Van Krieken et al. 2006: 379-380). Variations in interpretation appear between groups divided along socio-political, demographical lines, or even between individuals themselves (Freemantle and Hill 2002: 864, Heath 2005: 954, Blaxter 2000:44, Van Krieken et al. 2006). This ambiguity has underscored debates and conflicts in recent years between patients, academics, politicians, and medical practitioners on issues of medical authority, the extent of involvement in the decision making process over personal health as well as the health of others related to them through social structures and institutions (Van Krieken et al. 2006, Blaxter 2000, Bury 2008, White 2002).