Healthcare professionals' attitudes concerning prioritisation decisions: a quali-quantitative analysis in Angola

Ver registo simples
dc.contributor.authorBorges, Ana Pinto
dc.contributor.authorPinho, Micaela
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-19T16:20:10Z
dc.date.available2021-02-19T16:20:10Z
dc.date.issued2021
dc.description.abstractBedside rationing decisions are a necessary evil in the context of resource scarcity. The ethical values inherent in decisions about who to treat make interprofessional collaboration between health professionals essential. We evaluate and compare the attitudes of Angolan physicians and nurses towards patient’s prioritisation decisions and the rationing principles supported. Faced with rationing scenarios comprising of four-patient respondents should: 1) select the only patient to treat, explaining their choice; 2) establish a patient care sequential order. Non-parametric tests and multinomial logistic regressions were performed to compare patient’s choice between both groups and explore relations between socio-demographic, health and health-related behaviours and patient top priority assigned. Content analysis was used to explore the reasons for patients’ selection. Findings suggest that physicians and nurses share similar views, suggesting no tensions regarding patient’s prioritisation. Respondents support health maximisation, severity and fair-innings as rationing principles while waiting time and health-related behaviours were undervalued.pt_PT
dc.identifier.citationPinho, M., & Borges, A. P. (2021). Healthcare professionals' attitudes concerning prioritisation decisions: a quali-quantitative analysis in Angola. Global Business and Economics Review, 24(2), 2021. DOI: 10.1504/GBER.2021.10035512. Disponível no Repositório UPT, http://hdl.handle.net/11328/3375pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1504/GBER.2021.10035512pt_PT
dc.identifier.issn1097-4954 (Print)
dc.identifier.issn1745-1329 (Online)
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11328/3375
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherInderscience Enterprises Ltd.pt_PT
dc.rightsrestricted accesspt_PT
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/pt_PT
dc.subjectHealth economicspt_PT
dc.subjectRationing principlespt_PT
dc.subjectPatient’s selectionpt_PT
dc.subjectExplicit healthcare rationingpt_PT
dc.subjectAttitudes of health professionalspt_PT
dc.subjectAngolapt_PT
dc.titleHealthcare professionals' attitudes concerning prioritisation decisions: a quali-quantitative analysis in Angolapt_PT
dc.typejournal articlept_PT
degois.publication.firstPage128pt_PT
degois.publication.lastPage146pt_PT
degois.publication.titleGlobal Business and Economics Reviewpt_PT
degois.publication.volume24(2)pt_PT
dspace.entity.typePublicationen
person.affiliation.nameREMIT – Research on Economics, Management and Information Technologies
person.familyNamePinho
person.givenNameMicaela
person.identifier.ciencia-idAF14-3E2F-3400
person.identifier.orcid0000-0003-2021-9141
person.identifier.ridL-1789-2018
person.identifier.scopus-author-id23990998900
relation.isAuthorOfPublicationb73425ae-9c53-43ec-9bef-8d0ebebecc6b
relation.isAuthorOfPublication.latestForDiscoveryb73425ae-9c53-43ec-9bef-8d0ebebecc6b

Ficheiros

Principais
A mostrar 1 - 1 de 1
Nome:
GBER240202 PINHO_284794 - Vol. 24 Nº2 pag. 128-146.pdf
Tamanho:
263.47 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Ver/Abrir

Coleções

REMIT - Artigos em Revistas Internacionais / Papers in International Journals