Bedside healthcare rationing dilemmas: A survey from Croatia

The purpose of this paper is to explore Croatian views about issues regarding bedside rationing decisions.

An
online questionnaire was used to collect data from a sample of 243
Croatian citizens. In a context of hypothetical scenarios involving
priority setting decisions taking by physicians, the present study
elicits Croatian respondents’ views concerning: the ethical principles
that should guide patients prioritization; the parties that should make
prioritization decisions; and the likelihood of healthcare rationing
becoming a reality. Descriptive analysis, factor analysis and parametric
and non-parametric tests were performed.

Findings
suggest that Croatian respondents: support multiple substantive
rationing criteria, with an incident in favoring the worst-off, reducing
inequalities in health, translated in the fair-innings argument and
efficiency achievement; appoint health professionals as rationing
decision makers; and do not seem to believe in the possibility of
patient selection becoming a reality.

Favoring
the worst-off, equalizing life time health and the pursuit of
efficiency seem to be the criteria most preferred by Croatian
respondents to guide rationing policy at the micro level.

This
study is the first attempt to elicit Croatian opinions concerning
several rationing criteria inherent in healthcare micro allocation
decisions. Healthcare rationing is a serious challenge to Croatian
policy makers and so it would be useful for the public’s perceptions and
beliefs to be considered.