Managing NHS money in Portugal: who decides?

Author:

Reis Ana MariaORCID,Pinto Borges Ana,Araújo Nuno

Abstract

PurposeThe need to reduce health expenditures raises the discussion on rationing possibilities and there is a growing interest in considering society's perspectives. The aim of this paper was to evaluate Portuguese citizens' opinion regarding the imposition of limits on National Health Service (NHS) spending. We also asked who decides how NHS money is spent, in order to obtain the respondents' views on public involvement.Design/methodology/approachAn online questionnaire was used to collect data. Descriptive and inferential statistics, factorial analysis and a logit model were applied.FindingsOur results showed that most of the respondents believe citizens have low participation on NHS' financial decisions, confirming the lack of public involvement. Health professionals are more likely to agree with limits on NHS spending, which could indicate potential inefficiencies.Practical implicationsFrom a health policy perspective, we have concluded that different stakeholders should be involved before deciding how public spending limits should be implemented. Health professionals' perspectives should be considered, taking advantage of their experience.Originality/valueThe main novelty of this paper is the evaluation of whether there should be limits on NHS spending, comparing health professionals and non-health professionals.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health Policy,Business, Management and Accounting (miscellaneous)

Reference49 articles.

1. Self-assessed health: what does it mean and what does it hide?;Social Science and Medicine,2014

2. Should lifestyles be a criterion for healthcare rationing? Evidence from a Portuguese survey;Journal of Research in Health Sciences,2017

3. Willingness to pay for other individuals' healthcare expenditures;Public Health,2017

4. Who should participate in health care priority setting and how should priorities be set? Evidence from a Portuguese survey;Revista Portuguesa de Saúde Pública,2013

5. Health care rationing: the public's debate;BMJ,1996

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. International Journal of Health Governance review: 26.2;International Journal of Health Governance;2021-04-30

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3