Journal of Public Health Medicine 25:4-7 (2003)
© 2003 Faculty of Public Health Medicine of the Royal Colleges of Physicians of the United Kingdom
For Debate |
Very high cost treatment for a single individual – a case report
Jeremy Wight
Mike Richards
61 Endcliffe Vale Road, Sheffield S10 3ET.
The Children's Day Hospital, St James's Hospital, Beckett Street, Leeds LS9 2TF.
Address correspondence to Dr Jeremy Wight. E-mail: jeremy.wight@sheffieldn-pct.nhs.uk
A Health Authority was requested to fund immune tolerance induction for a young haemophiliac at a potential cost of up to £2 million over a year. The decision-making process adopted included an external review of the case, literature review to establish the evidence base for treatment, and extensive discussions with the clinicians involved. The Health Authority agreed to fund treatment, but with continuous review of the case and explicit criteria for abandoning treatment if it was not working. After 11 months these criteria were met, and the treatment was abandoned. The decision-making process and ethical issues involved in deciding whether or not to fund extremely high cost treatment for an individual patient are discussed. Cases such as this present a stark contrast between rights-based and utilitarian ethical approaches. Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) are more vulnerable (because of their smaller populations and budgets) than Health Authorities were to the financial destabilization that high-cost cases can cause. PCTs are advised to make arrangements to enter risk-sharing arrangements to spread the cost of such high-cost treatments.
Keywords: resource allocation, haemophilia, immune tolerance induction, ethics
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  M. L de Lemos Rationing costly treatments: can it be fair? Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, September 1, 2004; 10(3): 141 - 144. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|