Prioritization and Resource Allocation in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Recommendations for Colorectal and Pancreatic Cancer in Germany.

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a scarcity of resources with various effects on the care of cancer patients. This paper provides an English summary of a German guideline on prioritization and resource allocation for colorectal and pancreatic cancer in the context of the pandemic. Based on a selective literature review as well as empirical and ethical analyses, the research team of the CancerCOVID Consortium drafted recommendations for prioritizing diagnostic and treatment measures for both entities. The final version of the guideline received consent from the executive boards of nine societies of the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), 20 further professional organizations and 22 other experts from various disciplines as well as patient representatives. The guiding principle for the prioritization of decisions is the minimization of harm. Prioritization decisions to fulfill this overall goal should be guided by (1) the urgency relevant to avoid or reduce harm, (2) the likelihood of success of the diagnostic or therapeutic measure advised, and (3) the availability of alternative treatment options. In the event of a relevant risk of harm as a result of prioritization, these decisions should be made by means of a team approach. Gender, age, disability, ethnicity, origin, and other social characteristics, such as social or insurance status, as well as the vehemence of a patient's treatment request and SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status should not be used as prioritization criteria. The guideline provides concrete recommendations for (1) diagnostic procedures, (2) surgical procedures for cancer, and (3) systemic treatment and radiotherapy in patients with colorectal or pancreatic cancer within the context of the German healthcare system.

Simulation of the mortality after different ex ante (secondary) and ex post (tertiary) triage methods in people with disabilities and pre-existing diseases.

The significant increase in patients during the COVID-19 pandemic presented the healthcare system with a variety of challenges. The intensive care unit is one of the areas particularly affected in this context. Only through extensive infection control measures as well as an enormous logistical effort was it possible to treat all patients requiring intensive care in Germany even during peak phases of the pandemic, and to prevent triage even in regions with high patient pressure and simultaneously low capacities. Regarding pandemic preparedness, the German Parliament passed a law on triage that explicitly prohibits ex post (tertiary) triage. In ex post triage, patients who are already being treated are included in the triage decision and treatment capacities are allocated according to the individual likelihood of success. Legal, ethical, and social considerations for triage in pandemics can be found in the literature, but there is no quantitative assessment with respect to different patient groups in the intensive care unit. This study addressed this gap and applied a simulation-based evaluation of ex ante (primary) and ex post triage policies in consideration of survival probabilities, impairments, and pre-existing conditions. The results show that application of ex post triage based on survival probabilities leads to a reduction in mortality in the intensive care unit for all patient groups. In the scenario close to a real-world situation, considering different impaired and prediseased patient groups, a reduction in mortality of approximately 15% was already achieved by applying ex post triage on the first day. This mortality-reducing effect of ex post triage is further enhanced as the number of patients requiring intensive care increases.

[Testicular Cancer Screening in Men Aged 16 Years and Older: IQWiG ThemenCheck Health Technology Assessment Report on Medical, Economic, Social, Ethical, Legal and Organisational Aspects]. / Hodenkrebsscreening bei Männern ab 16 Jahren: IQWiG ThemenCheck Health Technology Assessment-Bericht zu medizinischen, ökonomischen, sozialen, ethischen, rechtlichen und organisatorischen Aspekten.

BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer occurs mainly in young men between 25 and 45 years and is the most common cancer at this age. Possible testicular cancer early detection measures, clinical palpation and scrotal ultrasound (CUS) or testicular self-examination (TSE) in asymptomatic men aged 16 years and older, could perhaps avoid deaths and aggressive late therapies. Therefore, we investigated whether these measures have an additional benefit compared to the current situation. Ethical, legal, social and organisational aspects were considered as well. METHODS: The methodology of this review follows IQWiG's "Allgemeine[n] Methoden Version 5.0". In addition, to estimate the theoretically possible benefits and potential harms of screening, a supplementary presentation was used for the benefit assessment based on published data from tumour registries and data on predictive values from diagnostic studies. RESULTS: No intervention studies were identified, therefore evidence-based statements on additional benefit or harm of the studied interventions could not be made. The epidemiological data showed that per 100,000 men participating in screening annually, a maximum of 1.2 advanced tumours and 0.4 deaths would have been preventable. Harm calculations suggest that with CUS of 100,000 men, 1 to 22 unnecessary testicular exposures or removals might be expected, with TSE it would be 2 cases. However, these data on the possible harm of screening are subject to great uncertainty. CONCLUSIONS: There are no intervention studies demonstrating that the benefit of testicular cancer screening in men aged 16 years and older outweighs the harm. The maximum possible additional benefit is low and chances of detection and cure are good even without screening. At present, testicular cancer screening cannot be recommended.

Effectiveness of a complex regional advance care planning intervention to improve care consistency with care preferences: study protocol for a multi-center, cluster-randomized controlled trial focusing on nursing home residents (BEVOR trial).

BACKGROUND: According to recent legislation, facilitated advance care planning (ACP) for nursing home (NH) residents is covered by German sickness funds. However, the effects of ACP on patient-relevant outcomes have not been studied in Germany yet. This study investigates whether implementing a complex regional ACP intervention improves care consistency with care preferences in NH residents. METHODS: This is a parallel-group cluster-randomized controlled trial (cRCT) with 48 NHs (≈ 3840 resident beds) between 09/2019 and 02/2023. The intervention group will receive a complex, regional ACP intervention aiming at sustainable systems redesign at all levels (individual, institutional, regional). The intervention comprises comprehensive training of ACP facilitators, implementation of reliable ACP processes, organizational development in the NH and other relevant institutions of the regional healthcare system, and education of health professionals caring for the residents. Control group NHs will deliver care as usual. Primary outcome is the hospitalization rate during the 12-months observation period. Secondary outcomes include the rate of residents whose preferences were known and honored in potentially life-threatening events, hospital days, index treatments like resuscitation and artificial ventilation, advance directives, quality of life, psychological burden on bereaved families, and costs of care. The NHs will provide anonymous, aggregated data of all their residents on the primary outcome and several secondary outcomes (data collection 1). For residents who have given informed consent, we will evaluate care consistency with care preferences and further secondary outcomes, based on chart reviews and short interviews with residents, surrogates, and carers (data collection 2). Process evaluation will aim to explain barriers and facilitators, economic evaluation the cost implications. DISCUSSION: This study has the potential for high-quality evidence on the effects of a complex regional ACP intervention on NH residents, their families and surrogates, NH staff, and health care utilization in Germany. It is the first cRCT investigating a comprehensive regional ACP intervention that aims at improving patient-relevant clinical outcomes, addressing and educating multiple institutions and health care providers, besides qualification of ACP facilitators. Thereby, it can generate evidence on the potential of ACP to effectively promote patient-centered care in the vulnerable population of frail and often chronically ill elderly. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04333303 . Registered 30 March 2020.

[Quality and ethics in healthcare]. / Qualität und Ethik in der Gesundheitsversorgung.

The term "quality" in healthcare is frequently used but defined in different ways. On the one hand, quality describes the nature or characteristic of things and is descriptive in this respect. In quality management and quality assurance, however, the focus is on the normative dimension of quality, referring to the evaluation of structures, processes, or results of actions in the context of healthcare. There are several links between ethical considerations in healthcare and quality of healthcare. First, the provision and assurance of high quality is an ethical imperative, mandated by the principles of beneficence and nonmaleficence. However, for high ethical quality of care, the ethical principles of respect for patient autonomy and justice must also be considered. Last but not least, the determination and justification of what "good" or "high" quality in healthcare means must be reflected from an ethical perspective. This article analyses these ethical dimensions of quality management and quality assurance. To achieve this goal, it first explains which ethical requirements have to be considered as quality criteria in patient care. Subsequently, ethically relevant challenges in determining quality in healthcare are identified based on criteria of outcome quality, and the teaching of professional competencies in medical education is discussed as a possible contribution to quality and quality assurance in healthcare. The paper concludes with considerations on determining and assuring quality under conditions of limited healthcare resources.

Barriers Against Prevention Programs for Iodine Deficiency Disorders in Europe: A Delphi Study.

Background: Although substantial progress has been made in recent decades in eliminating iodine deficiency, iodine deficiency disorders (IDDs) are still prevalent in European countries. Challenges include ineffective public health programs and discontinuation of IDD prevention. However, the barriers against the implementation and continuation of prevention and monitoring of IDD remain unclear. Therefore, the objective of our study was to identify potential barriers against pan-European IDD prevention and monitoring programs and to find solutions for the different challenges. Methods: We conducted a Delphi study consisting of three rounds. We identified potential participants with expertise and experience in relevant fields from all European countries, including policy makers, health care professionals, health scientists, and patient representatives. The Delphi method was conducted with open-ended questions and item ranking to achieve group consensus on potential barriers against national and pan-European IDD prevention and monitoring programs and related solutions to overcome those barriers. The answers of the Delphi rounds were analyzed using qualitative content analysis and descriptive analysis methods. In addition, we conducted two expert interviews to analyze and discuss the study results. Results: Eighty experts from 36 countries and different fields of work participated in the first Delphi round, 52 in the second, and 46 in the third. Potential barriers include challenges in the fields of knowledge and information, implementation and management, communication and cooperation, political support, and differences between the European countries. Ranked solutions addressing these barriers include cooperation with different stakeholders, gaining knowledge, sharing information, the development of a European program with national specification, European guidelines/recommendations, and European monitoring. The ranking gives a first overview as to which of these barriers would need to be solved most urgently and which solutions may be most helpful. Conclusion: In our study, we derived key information and first insights with regard to barriers against IDD prevention programs from a broad range of stakeholders. Most barriers were found in the category of implementation and management. Also a lack of political support seems to play an important role. The findings of our study may help decision makers in health policy to develop more effective IDD prevention and monitoring strategies.

Decisions on the allocation of intensive care resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic : Clinical and ethical recommendations of DIVI, DGINA, DGAI, DGIIN, DGNI, DGP, DGP and AEM.

In view of the globally evolving coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, German hospitals rapidly expanded their intensive care capacities. However, it is possible that even with an optimal use of the increased resources, these will not suffice for all patients in need. Therefore, recommendations for the allocation of intensive care resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic have been developed by a multidisciplinary group of authors with the support of eight scientific medical societies. The recommendations for procedures and criteria for prioritisations in case of resource scarcity are based on scientific evidence, ethicolegal considerations and practical experience. Medical decisions must always be based on the need and the treatment preferences of the individual patient. In addition to this patient-centred approach, prioritisations in case of resource scarcity require a supraindividual perspective. In such situations, prioritisations should be based on the criterion of clinical prospect of success in order to minimize the number of preventable deaths due to resource scarcity and to avoid discrimination based on age, disabilities or social factors. The assessment of the clinical prospect of success should take into account the severity of the current illness, severe comorbidities and the patient's general health status prior to the current illness.

[Decisions on the allocation of intensive care resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic : Clinical and ethical recommendations of DIVI, DGINA, DGAI, DGIIN, DGNI, DGP, DGP and AEM. German version]. / Entscheidungen über die Zuteilung intensivmedizinischer Ressourcen im Kontext der COVID-19-Pandemie : Klinisch-ethische Empfehlungen der DIVI, der DGINA, der DGAI, der DGIIN, der DGNI, der DGP, der DGP und der AEM.

In view of the globally evolving Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) pandemic, German hospitals rapidly expanded their intensive care capacities. However, it is possible that even with an optimal use of the increased resources, these will not suffice for all patients in need. Therefore, recommendations for the allocation of intensive care resources in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic have been developed by a multidisciplinary authors group with support of eight scientific medical societies. The recommendations for procedures and criteria for prioritisations in case of resource scarcity are based on scientific evidence, ethico-legal considerations and practical experience. Medical decisions must always be based on the need and the treatment preferences of the individual patient. In addition to this patient-centred approach, prioritisations in case of resource scarcity require a supra-individual perspective. In such situations, prioritisations should be based on the criterion of clinical prospect of success in order to minimize the number of preventable deaths due to resource scarcity and to avoid discrimination based on age, disabilities or social factors. Assessment of the clinical prospect of success should take into account the severity of the current illness, severe comorbidities and the patient's general health status prior to the current illness.

[Ethical implications of digital public health]. / Ethische Fragen von Digital Public Health.

Digital technologies in public health have the potential to improve health promotion and disease prevention by the efficient registration, storage, and processing of large amounts of health data. Digital public health also raises - like other technological developments - several ethical issues, which are discussed in this article.A fundamental question in the ethical evaluation of digital public health interventions concerns the goal of the intervention: An intervention should serve the established goals of public health and not financial interests, to realize potential health benefits for the population. In addition, equity issues are especially relevant, because digital public health may reduce or increase health inequalities in the population. Furthermore, the protection of privacy and potentially sensitive health data are relevant. As digital public health applications vary considerably, each application has to be assessed individually regarding its ethical implications. This article therefore presents a normative framework and a methodological approach for the ethical evaluation of digital public health applications. By developing ethically justified recommendations for the design and use of digital public health applications, the ethical evaluation can contribute to an ethically justified practice of digital public health.

Lethal privacy: Quantifying life years lost if the right to informational self-determination guides genetic screening for Lynch syndrome.

Genetic relatives of hereditary colorectal cancer patients with Lynch syndrome (LS) are at risk of cancer. Testing both colorectal cancer patients and relatives of mutation carriers for LS allows targeted prevention. However, this could mean disclosing sensitive health data to family members. In light of potential trade-offs between cost-effectiveness and patient privacy, this study investigates the implications of increasing test uptake in Germany. Out of 22 screening strategies for LS, the non-dominated and current German strategies were assessed from the perspective of the statutory health insurance. Life years gained by increased prevention were estimated with Markov models. The effects and implications of different test uptake rates in index patients and their relatives were investigated by scenario analysis. Privacy limitations could yield health gains of up to 2500 undiscounted life years for first-degree relatives of index patients and substantially improve cost-effectiveness. However, this approach may contradict the right to informational self-determination. This study demonstrates the effect higher LS test uptakes could have on the lives and rights of colorectal cancer patients and their relatives. It shows potential conflicts between the efficient use of health care resources on the one hand and reasonable consideration of patient autonomy on the other.

Health Technology Assessment of Public Health Interventions Published 2012 to 2016: An Analysis of Characteristics and Comparison of Methods.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to provide an overview of the methodological characteristics and compare the assessment methods applied in health technology assessments (HTAs) of public health interventions (PHIs). METHODS: We defined a PHI as a population-based intervention on health promotion or for primary prevention of chronic or nonchronic diseases. HTAs on PHIs were identified by systematically searching the Web pages of members of international HTA networks. We included only full HTA reports published between 2012 and 2016. Two reviewers extracted data on the methods used to assess effectiveness/safety, as well as on economic, social, cultural, ethical, and legal aspects using a-priori standardized tables. RESULTS: We included ten HTAs provided by four different organizations. Of these, all reports assessed the effectiveness of the interventions and conducted economic evaluations, seven investigated social/cultural aspects, and four each considered legal and ethical aspects, respectively. Some reports addressed applicability, context/setting, and intervention fidelity issues in different ways. We found that most HTAs adapted their methods to some extent, for example, by including nonrandomized studies, expanding the search strategy, involving stakeholders, or applying a framework to guide the HTA process. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis provides a comprehensive overview of methods applied in HTAs on public health interventions. We found that a heterogeneous set of approaches is used to deal with the challenges of evaluating complex public health interventions.

[Medicine and Economy: Measures for a Science Based, Patient-Centred and Resource Conscious Care. The Association of Scientific Medical Societies' (AWMF) Strategy Paper]. / Medizin und Ökonomie: Maßnahmen für eine wissenschaftlich begründete, patientenzentrierte und ressourcenbewusste Versorgung. Ein Strategiepapier der Arbeitsgemeinschaft der Wissenschaftlichen Medizinischen Fachgesellschaften (AWMF).

The AWMF and its medical societies perceive an increasing dominance of economic targets in the hospital health care sector, leading to impairment of patient care. While resource use in health care should be appropriate, efficient and fairly allocated, "economization" creates a burdensome situation for physicians, nurses and other health care professionals.The AMWF and the medical societies studied causes and developed measures for a scientific, patient-centred and resource-conscious medical care. Disincentives due to the remuneration system, number and equipment of hospitals resp. specialist departments and their basic funding need to be overcome. Proposed actions relate to the patient-doctor-level, the management level of hospitals and the level of planning and financing hospitals including compensation of hospital care. To place patients and their health in the forefront again, joint efforts of all stakeholders in health care are needed.

Mobile health ethics and the expanding role of autonomy.

Mhealth technology is mushrooming world-wide and, in a variety of forms, reaches increasing numbers of users in ever-widening contexts and virtually independent from standard medical evidence assessment. Yet, debate on the broader societal impact including in particular mapping and classification of ethical issues raised has been limited. This article, as part of an ongoing empirically informed ethical research project, provides an overview of ethical issues of mhealth applications with a specific focus on implications on autonomy as a key notion in the debate. A multi-stage model of references to the potential of mhealth use for strengthening some or other form of self-determination will be proposed as a descriptive tool. It illustrates an assumed continuum of enhanced autonomy via mhealth broadly conceived: from patient to user autonomy, to improved health literacy, and finally to the vision of supra-individual empowerment and democratised, participatory health and medicine as a whole. On closer examination, however, these references are frequently ambivalent or vague, perpetuating the at times uncritical use of established autonomy concepts in medical ethics. The article suggests zooming in on the range of autonomy-related aspects against the backdrop of digital innovation and datafied health more generally, and on this basis add to existing frameworks for the ethical evaluation of mhealth more specifically.

Health technology assessment of public health interventions: an analysis of characteristics and comparison of methods-study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Conducting a health technology assessment (HTA) of public health interventions (PHIs) poses some challenges. PHIs are often complex interventions, which affect the number and degree of interactions of the aspects to be assessed. Randomized controlled trials on PHIs are rare as they are difficult to conduct because of ethical or feasibility issues. The aim of this study is to provide an overview of the methodological characteristics and to compare the applied assessment methods in HTAs on PHIs. METHODS: We will systematically search HTA agencies for HTAs on PHIs published between 2012 and 2016. We will identify the HTAs by screening the webpages of members of international HTA organizations. One reviewer will screen the list of HTAs on the webpages of members of international HTA organization, and a second review will double-check the excluded records. For this methodological review, we define a PHI as a population-based intervention on health promotion or for primary prevention of chronic or non-chronic diseases. Only full HTA reports will be included. At maximum, we will include a sample of 100 HTAs. In the case that we identify more than 100 relevant HTAs, we will perform a random selection. We will extract data on effectiveness, safety and economic as well as on social, cultural, ethical and legal aspects in a priori piloted standardized tables. We will not assess the risk of bias as we focus on exploring methodological features. Data extraction will be performed by one reviewer and verified by a second. We will synthesize data using tables and in a structured narrative way. DISCUSSION: Our analysis will provide a comprehensive and current overview of methods applied in HTAs on PHIs. We will discuss approaches that may be promising to overcome the challenges of evaluating PHIs.

Financial Toxicity of Cancer Drugs: Possible Remedies from an Ethical Perspective.

Spiraling costs of cancer treatments have become a major concern for the payers in the health care system and for individual patients suffering from the cancer drugs' financial toxicity. This article discusses possible solutions from an ethical perspective. First, it gives some orientation about what constitutes a fair price for innovative anticancer agents. While a definitive answer remains difficult, there are good reasons to enter into price negotiations with the pharmaceutical companies to align the price with the R&D costs and the added value of the product. Information about the drug's cost-effectiveness should be available, a fixed threshold, however, seems ethically problematic. Rather, a 'signal cost-effectiveness threshold' should indicate when the drug price requires special justification. Further strategies include an improved benefit assessment after market authorization by independent publicly financed studies, which will provide a valid basis for price negotiations and clinical decision-making at the micro level. Last but not least, cancer treatments should be tailored not only to the biology of the tumor but also to the preferences of the patient. Primarily mandated by the respect for autonomy, promoting patient-centered care has the potential to improve quality of care and enable a wise use of scarce health care resources.

Does facilitated Advance Care Planning reduce the costs of care near the end of life? Systematic review and ethical considerations.

BACKGROUND: While there is increasing evidence that Advance Care Planning has the potential to strengthen patient autonomy and improve quality of care near the end of life, it remains unclear whether it could also reduce net costs of care. AIM: This study aims to describe the cost implications of Advance Care Planning programmes and discusses ethical conflicts arising in this context. DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. DATA SOURCES: We systematically searched the databases PubMed, NHS EED, EURONHEED, Cochrane Library and EconLit. We included empirical studies (no limitation to study type) that investigated the cost implications of Advance Care Planning programmes involving professionally facilitated end-of-life discussions. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Seven studies met our inclusion criteria. Four of them used a randomised controlled design, one used a before-after design and two were observational studies. Six studies found reductions in costs of care ranging from USD1041 to USD64,827 per patient, depending on the study period and the cost measurement. One study detected no differences in costs. Studies varied considerably regarding the Advance Care Planning intervention, patient selection and costs measured which may explain some of the variations in findings. NORMATIVE APPRAISAL: Looking at the impact of Advance Care Planning on costs raises delicate ethical issues. Given the increasing pressure to reduce expenditures, there may be concerns that cost considerations could unduly influence the sensitive communication process, thus jeopardising patient autonomy. Safeguards are proposed to reduce these risks. CONCLUSION: The limited data indicate net cost savings may be realised with Advance Care Planning. Methodologically robust trials with clearly defined Advance Care Planning interventions are needed to make the costs and returns of Advance Care Planning transparent.

Putting public health ethics into practice: a systematic framework.

It is widely acknowledged that public health practice raises ethical issues that require a different approach than traditional biomedical ethics. Several frameworks for public health ethics (PHE) have been proposed; however, none of them provides a practice-oriented combination of the two necessary components: (1) a set of normative criteria based on an explicit ethical justification and (2) a structured methodological approach for applying the resulting normative criteria to concrete public health (PH) issues. Building on prior work in the field and integrating valuable elements of other approaches to PHE, we present a systematic ethical framework that shall guide professionals in planning, conducting, and evaluating PH interventions. Based on a coherentist model of ethical justification, the proposed framework contains (1) an explicit normative foundation with five substantive criteria and seven procedural conditions to guarantee a fair decision process, and (2) a six-step methodological approach for applying the criteria and conditions to the practice of PH and health policy. The framework explicitly ties together ethical analysis and empirical evidence, thus striving for evidence-based PHE. It can provide normative guidance to those who analyze the ethical implications of PH practice including academic ethicists, health policy makers, health technology assessment bodies, and PH professionals. It will enable those who implement a PH intervention and those affected by it (i.e., the target population) to critically assess whether and how the required ethical considerations have been taken into account. Thereby, the framework can contribute to assuring the quality of ethical analysis in PH. Whether the presented framework will be able to achieve its goals has to be determined by evaluating its practical application.

[Does ethics pay off? Need and perspectives of value management in hospitals]. / Zahlt sich Ethik aus? Notwendigkeit und Perspektiven des Wertemanagements im Krankenhaus.

The economic pressure on German hospitals has increased considerably over the last years, mainly because of the introduction of a flat-rate payment system, and it will most likely further increase under the current demographic and political conditions. The growing dominance of economics in the inpatient sector increases the pressure on hospital staff and results in an increased volume of care (with sometimes inappropriate overtreatment) and uncontrolled rationing and a continuous struggle to maintain the quality of patient care. This development is not only alarming from an ethical perspective, but also impairs the hospital's economic performance. To counter the increasing economic pressure with "more ethics" does--according to the line of reasoning adopted in this article--not appear to be very successful. Rather, central ethical values in inpatient care have to become an integral part of hospital management. This value management first requires a clear definition of the normative standards, e.g. within a mission statement. Second, the realisation of the normative standards in routine inpatient care has to be systematically assessed, evaluated and managed. Since normative standards are difficult to measure objectively and on a quantitative scale, (repeated) surveys among hospital staff are the central instrument to secure the "internal quality" of the hospital. It appears very likely that more ethics in the hospital will pay off by improving its economic performance. The empirical proof for this conceptually extremely plausible hypothesis has yet to be provided.

Criteria for fairly allocating scarce health-care resources to genetic tests: which matter most?

The use of genetic tests is expanding rapidly. Given limited health-care budgets throughout Europe and few national coverage decisions specifically for genetic tests, decisions about allocating scarce resources to genetic tests are frequently ad hoc and left to lower-level decision makers. This study assesses substantive ethical and economic criteria to prioritize genetic services in a reasonable and fair manner. Principles for allocating health-care resources can be classified into four categories: need-based allocation; maximizing total benefits; treating people equally; and promoting and rewarding social usefulness. In the face of scarcity, the degree of an individual's need for medical intervention is an important criterion. Also, different economic concepts of efficiency are of relevance in the theory and practice of prioritizing genetic tests. Equity concerns are most likely to be relevant in terms of avoiding undesirable inequities, which may also set boundaries to the use of efficiency as a prioritization criterion. The aim of promoting and rewarding social usefulness is unlikely to be relevant to the question of what priority a genetic test should have in clinical practice. Further work is needed to select an appropriate set of criteria; operationalize them; and assign weights before some kind of standardized priority information can be added to information sources for genetic services. Besides the substantive criteria, formal considerations like those pointed out in the framework of accountability for reasonableness need to be considered in decision making.

Re-focusing the ethical discourse on personalized medicine: a qualitative interview study with stakeholders in the German healthcare system.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, personalized medicine (PM) has become a highly regarded line of development in medicine. Yet, it is still a relatively new field. As a consequence, the discussion of its future developments, in particular of its ethical implications, in most cases can only be anticipative. Such anticipative discussions, however, pose several challenges. Nevertheless, they play a crucial role for shaping PM's further developments. Therefore, it is vital to understand how the ethical discourse on PM is conducted, i.e. on what - empirical and normative - assumptions ethical arguments are based regarding PM's current and future developments. METHODS: To gather this information, we conducted a qualitative interview study with stakeholders in the German health care system. Our purposive sample included 17 representatives of basic research, clinical research, health economics, regulatory authorities, reimbursement institutions, pharmaceutical industry, patient organizations, as well as clinicians and legal experts involved in PM developments or policy making. We used an interview guide with open-ended questions and analyzed transcriptions of the interviews by means of qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: The respondents addressed a multitude of concerns in the context of research on as well as application of personalized preventive and therapeutic measures both on the individual and on the societal level. Interestingly, regarding future developments of PM the ethical evaluation seemed to follow the rule: the less likely its application, the more problematic a PM measure is assessed. The more likely its application, on the other hand, the less problematic it is evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study suggest re-focusing the ethical discourse on PM in Germany towards a constructive ethical monitoring which ensures to include only, nevertheless all of the actual and/or potential concerns that are ethically relevant in order to allow balancing them against the actual and potential ethically relevant benefits of PM measures. To render this possible, we propose a strategy for evaluating ethical concerns in the context of PM.