PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY

Purpose: To describe and evaluate priority setting in an Acute Care hospital in Argentina, using Accountability for Reasonableness, an ethical framework for fair priority setting. Methods: Case Study involving key informant interviews and document review. Thirty respondents were identified using a s...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Gordon,Heather, Kapiriri,Lydia, Martin,Douglas K
Lenguaje:	English
Publicado:	Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios en Bioética, Universidad de Chile 2009
Materias:	priority setting Argentina hospital fairness accountability for reasonableness
Acceso en línea:	http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1726-569X2009000200009
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:scielo:S1726-569X2009000200009
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:scielo:S1726-569X20090002000092010-09-07PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDYGordon,HeatherKapiriri,LydiaMartin,Douglas K priority setting Argentina hospital fairness accountability for reasonableness Purpose: To describe and evaluate priority setting in an Acute Care hospital in Argentina, using Accountability for Reasonableness, an ethical framework for fair priority setting. Methods: Case Study involving key informant interviews and document review. Thirty respondents were identified using a snowball sampling strategy. A modified thematic approach was used in analyzing the data. Results: Priorities are primarily determined at the Department of Health. The committee which is supposed to set priorities within the hospital was thought not to have much influence. Decisions were based on government policies and objectives, personal relationships, economic, political, historical and arbitrary reasons. Decisions at the DOH were publicized through internet; however, apart from the tenders and a general budget, details of hospital decisions were not publicized. CATA provided an accessible but ineffective forum for appeals. There were no clear mechanisms for appeals and leadership to ensure adherence to a fair process. Conclusions: In spite of their efforts to ensure fairness, Priority setting in the study hospital did not meet all the four conditions of a fair process. Policy discussions on improving legitimacy and fairness provided an opportunity for improving fairness in the hospital and Accountability for Reasonableness might be a useful framework for analysis and for identifying and improving strategies.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCentro Interdisciplinario de Estudios en Bioética, Universidad de ChileActa bioethica v.15 n.2 20092009-11-01text/htmlhttp://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1726-569X2009000200009en10.4067/S1726-569X2009000200009
institution	Scielo Chile
collection	Scielo Chile
language	English
topic	priority setting Argentina hospital fairness accountability for reasonableness
spellingShingle	priority setting Argentina hospital fairness accountability for reasonableness Gordon,Heather Kapiriri,Lydia Martin,Douglas K PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
description	Purpose: To describe and evaluate priority setting in an Acute Care hospital in Argentina, using Accountability for Reasonableness, an ethical framework for fair priority setting. Methods: Case Study involving key informant interviews and document review. Thirty respondents were identified using a snowball sampling strategy. A modified thematic approach was used in analyzing the data. Results: Priorities are primarily determined at the Department of Health. The committee which is supposed to set priorities within the hospital was thought not to have much influence. Decisions were based on government policies and objectives, personal relationships, economic, political, historical and arbitrary reasons. Decisions at the DOH were publicized through internet; however, apart from the tenders and a general budget, details of hospital decisions were not publicized. CATA provided an accessible but ineffective forum for appeals. There were no clear mechanisms for appeals and leadership to ensure adherence to a fair process. Conclusions: In spite of their efforts to ensure fairness, Priority setting in the study hospital did not meet all the four conditions of a fair process. Policy discussions on improving legitimacy and fairness provided an opportunity for improving fairness in the hospital and Accountability for Reasonableness might be a useful framework for analysis and for identifying and improving strategies.
author	Gordon,Heather Kapiriri,Lydia Martin,Douglas K
author_facet	Gordon,Heather Kapiriri,Lydia Martin,Douglas K
author_sort	Gordon,Heather
title	PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
title_short	PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
title_full	PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
title_fullStr	PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
title_full_unstemmed	PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY
title_sort	priority setting in an acute care hospital in argentina: a qualitative case study
publisher	Centro Interdisciplinario de Estudios en Bioética, Universidad de Chile
publishDate	2009
url	http://www.scielo.cl/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1726-569X2009000200009
work_keys_str_mv	AT gordonheather prioritysettinginanacutecarehospitalinargentinaaqualitativecasestudy AT kapiririlydia prioritysettinginanacutecarehospitalinargentinaaqualitativecasestudy AT martindouglask prioritysettinginanacutecarehospitalinargentinaaqualitativecasestudy
_version_	1714207333479874560

PRIORITY SETTING IN AN ACUTE CARE HOSPITAL IN ARGENTINA: A QUALITATIVE CASE STUDY

Ejemplares similares