JNNP

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
[Advanced]

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this link to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Add article to my folders
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Benatar, S R
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Benatar, S R
Related Collections
Right arrow Human Rights
Right arrow Quality of life and health status
Right arrow Other Neurology
Right arrow Drugs: cardiovascular system
Right arrow Organization of health care
Right arrow Multiple sclerosis
Right arrow Socioeconomic Determinants of Health
Right arrow End of Life Decisions
Right arrow Palliative Medicine
Journal of Neurology Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 2003;74:1185-1186
© 2003 BMJ Publishing Group


EDITORIAL

Priority setting

Priority setting: learning to make tough decisions

S R Benatar

Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Observatory, 7925, Cape, South Africa; sbenatar@uctgsh1.uct.ac.za


The costs of trying to provide modern medical care for all who could potentially benefit exceed the capacity of most countries

Keywords: orthostatic hypotension; acetylcholinsterase inhibition; pyridostigmine; priority setting; rationing; resource allocation

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Priority setting (also termed resource allocation) for healthcare expenditure is inevitable in all societies, even the most affluent.1 New technologies are the dominant driving forces.2 Although these advances have been successful both in saving lives and in improving quality of life, the costs of trying to provide such modern medical care for all who could potentially benefit exceed the capacity of most countries.

A very considerable proportion of medical expenditure is generated on treating patients during what turns out to be the last year of life.3 It is now increasingly recognised that there are inadequate health returns from such expenditure (both in terms of duration and quality of life) and that there are limits to what medicine should be attempting to achieve.4 Consequently there has been a subtle, but largely unacknowledged, shift from a "sanctity of life" approach (in which medical care is continued relentlessly, even when death . . . [Full text of this article]







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER
Terms and conditions relating to subscriptions purchased online  ¦  Website terms and conditions  ¦  Privacy policy
Copyright © 2003 by the BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.