Equitable resource allocation in health emergencies: addressing racial disparities and ethical dilemmas.

ABSTRACT

This paper explores resource allocation complexities during health emergencies, focusing on pervasive racial disparities, notably affecting black communities. It aims to investigate alternatives to the Most Lives Saved approach, particularly its potential to exacerbate disparities. To analyse resource allocation strategies, the essay reviews the Dual-Principled System proposed by Bruce and Tallman (B+T) in 2021. B+T's proposal critiques previous methods like the Area Deprivation Index and First Come First Serve while seeking to balance equity and utility by adjusting triage scores based on diseases displaying racial disparities. However, the study identifies inherent challenges in subjectivity, complexity and fairness, necessitating a careful examination and potential innovative solutions. The examination of the Dual-Principled System uncovers challenges, leading to the identification of three main issues and potential solutions. Furthermore, to address subjectivity concerns, it is necessary to adopt objective disease selection criteria through data analysis. Moreover, proposed solutions for complexity include real-time data updates, adaptability and regional considerations. Fairness concerns can be mitigated through educational campaigns and a lottery system integrated with triage score adjustments. The study emphasises nuanced resource allocation with objective disease selection, adaptable strategies and educational initiatives, including a lottery system, aligning with fairness, equity and practicality. As healthcare evolves, resource allocation must align with justice, fostering inclusivity and responsiveness for all.