Health Outcome Prioritization in Alzheimer’s Disease: Understanding the Ethical Landscape

Author:

McKeown Alex1,Turner Andrew2,Angehrn Zuzanna3,Gove Dianne4,Ly Amanda5,Nordon Clementine6,Nelson Mia7,Tochel Claire7,Mittelstadt Brent8,Keenan Alex9,Smith Michael10,Singh Ilina1

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychiatry and Wellcome Centre for Ethics and Humanities, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

2. The National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration West [NIHR ARC West] at University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

3. Certara, Loerrach, Germany

4. Alzheimer Europe, Luxembourg

5. MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit & Centre for Academic Mental Health, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

6. CESP, INSERM U1178, Paris, France

7. Usher Institute of Population Health Sciences and Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

8. Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

9. Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Titusville, NJ, USA

10. Alzheimer Scotland Centre for Policy and Practice, University of the West of Scotland, Paisley, Scotland, UK

Abstract

Background: Dementia has been described as the greatest global health challenge in the 21st Century on account of longevity gains increasing its incidence, escalating health and social care pressures. These pressures highlight ethical, social, and political challenges about healthcare resource allocation, what health improvements matter to patients, and how they are measured. This study highlights the complexity of the ethical landscape, relating particularly to the balances that need to be struck when allocating resources; when measuring and prioritizing outcomes; and when individual preferences are sought. Objective: Health outcome prioritization is the ranking in order of desirability or importance of a set of disease-related objectives and their associated cost or risk. We analyze the complex ethical landscape in which this takes place in the most common dementia, Alzheimer’s disease. Methods: Narrative review of literature published since 2007, incorporating snowball sampling where necessary. We identified, thematized, and discussed key issues of ethical salience. Results: Eight areas of ethical salience for outcome prioritization emerged: 1) Public health and distributive justice, 2) Scarcity of resources, 3) Heterogeneity and changing circumstances, 4) Knowledge of treatment, 5) Values and circumstances, 6) Conflicting priorities, 7) Communication, autonomy and caregiver issues, and 8) Disclosure of risk. Conclusion: These areas highlight the difficult balance to be struck when allocating resources, when measuring and prioritizing outcomes, and when individual preferences are sought. We conclude by reflecting on how tools in social sciences and ethics can help address challenges posed by resource allocation, measuring and prioritizing outcomes, and eliciting stakeholder preferences.

Publisher

IOS Press

Subject

Psychiatry and Mental health,Geriatrics and Gerontology,Clinical Psychology,General Medicine,General Neuroscience

Cited by 5 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

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