Rationing health care: Views from general practice

• Published in: Social science & medicine (1982) Vol. 42; no. 7; pp. 1021 - 1025
• Main Author: Ayres, Philip J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Oxford Elsevier Ltd 01.04.1996; Elsevier; Pergamon Press Inc
• Series: Social Science & Medicine
• Subjects: Adult; Aged; Attitude of Health Personnel; Attitudes; Biological and medical sciences; Delivery of Health Care - trends; Delivery Systems; doctors' opinions; Family Practice - trends; Female; Forecasting; General aspects; general practice; General practitioners; Health Care; Health Care Rationing - trends; Health expenditure; Health Policy; Health Services; Health systems. Social services; Humans; Male; Medical sciences; Middle Aged; Physicians; Practice Patterns, Physicians' - trends; Public health. Hygiene; Public health. Hygiene-occupational medicine; Public opinion; qualitative research; Rationing; rationing doctors' opinions general practice qualitative research; Social research; State Medicine - trends; United Kingdom; United Kingdom; Europe; United Kingdom > UK; qualitative research; rationing; general practice; doctors' opinions; Human; Health system; Rationing; Social perception; Attitude; General practitioner; Health staff; Health economy; Inquiry; Cost control; Public health; Care
• ISSN: 0277-9536; 1873-5347
• DOI: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00213-8

General practitioners (GPs) in the United Kingdom are central to the commissioning of health care services. A qualitative study of their views was therefore designed, which incorporated an in-depth (open) interview technique carried out on a 20% sample of all GPs ( n = 100) in one United Kingdom Health District. The data from these interviews indicated that GPs were aware of, but had mixed feelings about the need for rationing. They expressed disquiet about the dilemma faced in rationing health care at the time of the consultation and readily associated issues of cost in their practice with rationing. Some of the currently adopted methods of rationing (waiting lists, co-payments and ability to pay) were commented upon. The respondents also made suggestions on how rationing could be carried out, which included: maximizing efficiency to reduce the need for rationing; using a third party committee to make rationing decisions, with a membership of clinicians, managers, and possibly public representatives, and; being explicit about how rationing is done. Fundholding brought rationing decisions to the fore, and worried most who discussed it in the context of rationing. The conclusion of this paper is that current implicit rationing policies in the National Health Service are flawed as they assume that GPs will ration health care at the time of the consultation. The involvement of GPs in the rationing process is important (particularly given the present expansion of GP fundholding), so there is a need for an alternative to the present system.