Access, equity and the role of rights in health care

Modern health care rhetoric promotes choice and individual patient rights as dominant values. Yet we also accept that in any regime constrained by finite resources, difficult choices between patients are inevitable. How can we balance rights to liberty, on the one hand, with equity in the allocation of scarce resources on the other? For example, the duty of health authorities to allocate resources is a duty owed to the community as a whole, rather than to specific individuals. Macro-duties of this nature are founded on the notion of equity and fairness amongst individuals rather than personal liberty. They presume that if hard choices have to be made, they will be resolved according to fair and consistent principles which treat equal cases equally, and unequal cases unequally. In this paper, we argue for greater clarity and candour in the health care rights debate. With this in mind, we discuss (1) private and public rights, (2) negative and positive rights, (3) procedural and substantive rights, (4) sustainable health care rights and (5) the New Zealand booking system for prioritising access to elective services. This system aims to consider: individual need and ability to benefit alongside the resources made available to elective health services in an attempt to give the principles of equity practical effect. We describe a continuum on which the merits of those, sometimes competing, values-liberty and equity-can be evaluated and assessed.

Self-exclusion from health care in women at high risk for postpartum depression

Background A significant proportion of women who are vulnerable to postnatal depression refuse to engage in treatment programmes. Little is known about them, other than some general demographic characteristics. In particular, their access to health care and their own and their infants' health outcomes are uncharted. Methods We conducted a nested cohort case-control study, using data from computerized health systems, and general practitioner (GP) and maternity records, to identify the characteristics, health service contacts, and maternal and infant health outcomes for primiparous antenatal clinic attenders at high risk for postnatal depression who either refused (self-exclusion group) or else agreed (take-up group) to receive additional Health Visiting support in pregnancy and the first 2 months postpartum. Results Women excluding themselves from Health Visitor support were younger and less highly educated than women willing to take up the support. They were less likely to attend midwifery, GP and routine Health Visitor appointments, but were more likely to book in late and to attend accident and emergency department (A&E). Their infants had poorer outcome in terms of gestation, birthweight and breastfeeding. Differences between the groups still obtained when age and education were taken into account for midwifery contacts, A&E attendance and gestation;the difference in the initiation of breast feeding was attenuated, but not wholly explained, by age and education. Conclusion A subgroup of psychologically vulnerable childbearing women are at particular risk for poor access to health care and adverse infant outcome. Barriers to take-up of services need to be understood in order better to deliver care.

Health-related quality of life in Huntington's disease: a comparison of two generic instruments, SF-36 and SIP

Whereas several clinical endpoints in monitoring the response to treatment in patients with Huntington's disease (HD) have been explored, there has been a paucity of research in the quality of life in such patients. The aim of this study was to validate the use of two generic health-related quality of life instruments (the Short Form 36 health survey questionnaire [SF-36] and the Sickness Impact Profile [SIP]) and to evaluate their psychometric properties. We found that both instruments demonstrated acceptable convergent validity and reliability for patients and carers. However, there was an advantage in using the SF-36 because of its more robust construct validity and test-retest reliability; furthermore, motor symptoms appeared to influence some strictly nonmotor dimensions of the SIP. On a pragmatic level, the SF-36 is shorter and quicker to administer and, therefore, easier for patients at various stages of the disease to complete. Thus, the SF-36 would appear to be the recommended instrument of choice for patients with HD and their carers, although further work needs to be done to investigate the sensitivity of this instrument longitudinally. (C) 2004 Movement Disorder Society.

Health-related quality of life in Huntington's disease: which factors matter most?

The aim of this article was to determine which aspects of Huntington's disease (HD) are most important with regard to the health-related quality of life (HrQOL) of patients with this neurodegenerative disease. Seventy patients with HD participated in the study. Assessment comprised the Unified Huntington's Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) motor, cognitive and functional capacity sections, and the Beck Depression inventory. Mental and physical HrQOL were assessed using summary scores of the SF-36. Multiple regression analyses showed that functional capacity and depressive mood were significantly associated with HrQOL, in that greater impairments in HrQOL were associated with higher levels of depressive mood and lower functional capacity. Motor symptoms and cognitive function were not found to be as closely linked with HrQOL. Therefore, it can be concluded that, depressive mood and greater functional incapacity are key factors in HrQOL for people with HD, and further longitudinal investigation will be useful to determine their utility as specific targets in intervention studies aimed at improving patient HrQOL, or whether other mediating variables. As these two factors had a similar association with the mental and physical summary scores of the SF-36, this generic HrQOL measure did not adequately capture and distinguish the true mental and physical health-related HrQOL in HD.

The Huntington's Disease health-related Quality of Life questionnaire (HDQoL): a disease-specific measure of health-related quality of life

Hocaoglu MB, Gaffan EA, Ho AK. The Huntington's disease health-related quality of life questionnaire: a disease-specific measure of health-related quality of life. Huntington's disease (HD) is a genetic neurodegenerative disorder characterized by motor, cognitive and psychiatric disturbances, and yet there is no disease-specific patient-reported health-related quality of life outcome measure for patients. Our aim was to develop and validate such an instrument, i.e. the Huntington's Disease health-related Quality of Life questionnaire (HDQoL), to capture the true impact of living with this disease. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the full spectrum of people living with HD, to form a pool of items, which were then examined in a larger sample prior to data-driven item reduction. We provide the statistical basis for the extraction of three different sets of scales from the HDQoL, and present validation and psychometric data on these scales using a sample of 152 participants living with HD. These new patient-derived scales provide promising patient-reported outcome measures for HD.

Health-related quality of life in Huntington’s Disease patients: a comparison of proxy assessment and patient self-rating using the disease-specific Huntington’s Disease health-related quality of life questionnaire (HDQoL)

Huntington’s disease (HD) is a fatal, neurodegenerative disease for which there is no known cure. Proxy evaluation is relevant for HD as its manifestation might limit the ability of persons to report their health-related quality of life (HrQoL). This study explored patient–proxy ratings of HrQoL of persons at different stages of HD, and examined factors that may affect proxy ratings. A total of 105 patient–proxy pairs completed the Huntington’s disease health-related quality of life questionnaire (HDQoL) and other established HrQoL measures (EQ-5D and SF-12v2). Proxy–patient agreement was assessed in terms of absolute level (mean ratings) and intraclass correlation. Proxies’ ratings were at a similar level to patients’ self-ratings on an overall Summary Score and on most of the six Specific Scales of the HDQoL. On the Specific Hopes and Worries Scale, proxies on average rated HrQoL as better than patients’ self-ratings, while on both the Specific Cognitive Scale and Specific Physical and Functional Scale proxies tended to rate HrQoL more poorly than patients themselves. The patient’s disease stage and mental wellbeing (SF-12 Mental Component scale) were the two factors that primarily affected proxy assessment. Proxy scores were strongly correlated with patients’ self-ratings of HrQoL, on the Summary Scale and all Specific Scales. The patient–proxy correlation was lower for patients at moderate stages of HD compared to patients at early and advanced stages. The proxy report version of the HDQoL is a useful complementary tool to self-assessment, and a promising alternative when individual patients with advanced HD are unable to self-report.

Health care rights and NHS rationing: turning theory into practice

How should we understand the nature of patients’ right in public health care systems? Are health care rights different to rights under a private contract for car insurance? This article distinguishes between public and private rights and the relevance of community interests and notions of social solidarity. It discusses the distinction between political and civil rights, and social and economic rights and the inherently political and redistributive nature of the latter. Nevertheless, social and economic rights certainly give rise to “rights” enforceable by the courts. In the UK (as in many other jurisdictions), the courts have favoured a “procedural” approach to the question, in which the courts closely scrutinise decisions and demand high standards of rationality from decision-makers. However, although this is the general rule, the article also discusses a number of exceptional cases where “substantive” remedies are available which guarantee patients access to the care they need.