...
首页> 外文期刊>Social science and medicine >The strategic defense of physician autonomy: State public health agencies as countervailing powers
【24h】

The strategic defense of physician autonomy: State public health agencies as countervailing powers

机译:医师自治的战略辩护:国家公共卫生机构作为反补贴权力

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Advances in genetic testing and the aggressive marketing of genetic tests by commercial diagnostic laboratories have driven both consumer demand and the need for unbiased information about how tests should guide healthcare delivery. This paper uses the countervailing powers framework to explore the role of state public health agencies as arbiters of quality and safety, specifically through their efforts to encourage physicians to follow evidence-based recommendations for screening for hereditary cancers. Social scientists have often viewed actions by the state to regulate cost, quality, or safety as a threat to physician autonomy. This paper draws on case studies from two US states Michigan and Connecticut to better understand the specific role of state public health agencies, and especially whether their activities to encourage adherence to evidence-based recommendations bolster or subvert the interests of other parties in the healthcare arena. We find that lacking authority to compel provider to follow evidence-based recommendations, they improvised ways to foster compliance voluntarily, for example, by emphasizing the role of the physician as gatekeeper, thus affirming the importance of physician autonomy and clinical judgment. Both states also used public health surveillance data to make rare diseases visible and illustrate gaps between recommendations and practice. Finally, they both showed that following evidence-based recommendations could align the professional and market interests of healthcare stakeholders. Both states employed similar strategies with similar effects, despite substantial differences in the regulatory climate and organizational capacity. Taken as a whole, their activities orchestrated a countervailing response that checked the profit-seeking motives of commercial laboratories. Our findings demonstrate that rather than eroding physician autonomy, state action to monitor healthcare quality and encourage adherence to evidence-based recommendations can actually reinforce physician authority. (C) 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
机译:遗传检测的进展和商业诊断实验室遗传测试的攻击性营销使消费者需求均推动了消费者需求和对无偏见的信息,了解如何指导医疗保健交付。本文采用了反补贴权框架,探讨了国家公共卫生机构作为质量和安全仲裁员的作用,特别是通过他们鼓励医生遵循基于证据的筛查筛查建议,探讨质量和安全的仲裁员。社会科学家们经常观察国家的行动,以规范成本,质量或安全作为对医生自治的威胁。本文借鉴了来自两个美国密歇根州和康涅狄格州的案例研究,以更好地了解国家公共卫生机构的具体作用,特别是他们的活动,以鼓励遵守基于证据的建议,或者颠覆医疗保健领域的其他方的利益。我们发现缺乏强迫提供商遵循基于证据的建议的权力,他们即使是自愿培养合规的方法,例如,通过强调医师作为门卫的作用,从而肯定了医生自治和临床判断的重要性。两国也使用公共卫生监测数据来使罕见疾病可见,并说明建议与实践之间的差距。最后,他们都表明,以下基于证据的建议可以对准医疗保健利益攸关方的专业和市场利益。尽管监管气候和组织能力具有重大差异,但两国都采用了类似的效果的类似策略。作为一个整体,他们的活动策划了一个反补贴反应,检查了商业实验室的争取动机。我们的研究结果表明,而不是侵蚀医生自主,国家行动监测医疗保健质量,并鼓励遵守基于证据的建议,实际上可以加强医生权力。 (c)2017 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号