0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
ARTICLE |

Fiscal Scarcity and the Inevitability of Bedside Budget Balancing

E. Haavi Morreim, PhD
Arch Intern Med. 1989;149(5):1012-1015. doi:10.1001/archinte.1989.00390050018003.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

• Until recently, generous third-party reimbursements enabled physicians to pursue each patient's interests with little regard to costs. Conscious rationing was required only episodically as some particular commodity, eg, transplant organs, was too scarce to meet demand, or as some patients lacked basic access to the health care system. Cost containment and the economic reorganization of medicine introduce a new sort of scarcity, requiring a different sort of rationing. "Fiscal scarcity," the general contraction of health care dollars, means that because every medical decision has its cost, every decision is now subject to scrutiny for its economic as well as its medical wisdom. Therefore, every detail of medicine is an allocation problem. Many observers argue that physicians can nevertheless avoid directly trading patients' interests against economic considerations: through "efficiency protocols" that eliminate marginal benefits, through turning economic rationing decisions over to outside parties, through avoiding cost constraints until society has established a just health care allocation system. This article shows that none of these proposals permits the physician to escape cost-cutting at the bedside.

(Arch Intern Med. 1989;149:1012-1015)

Topics

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Figures

Tables

References

Correspondence

CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Submit a Comment

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 51

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();