No CrossRef data available.
Commentary
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2009
Extract
Tom Halper is not the only American who has been looking at the rationing of renal replacement therapy in the United Kingdom. All are appalled at the denial of effective lifesaving therapy to elderly and high-risk patients, such as diabetics, with end stage renal failure (1). Some realize that the rationing practiced in the United Kingdom today may have to be applied in other countries tomorrow (2). Medical resources are not unlimited (3).
- Type
- Technology and Health Care for the Elderly
- Information
- International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , January 1985 , pp. 53 - 55
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1985
References
REFERENCES
2.Aaron, H. J., & Schwartz, W. B.The painful prescription—Rationing hospital care. Washington D.C: The Brookings Institution, 1984.Google Scholar
3.Owen, D.Clinical freedom and professional freedom. Lancet, 1976, 1, 1006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Challah, S., Wing, A. J., Bauer, R., Morris, R. W., & Schroeder, S. A.Negative selection of patients for dialysis and transplantation in the United Kingdom. British Medical Journal, 1984, 288, 1119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Laing, W.End-stage renal failure: OHE briefing. London: Office of Health Economics, 1980.Google Scholar
6.Jones, N. F., Goodwin, F. J., Roberts, A. H.Manpower and workload in renal medicine in the United Kingdom 1975–1982. British Medical Journal, 1984, 288, 992–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Wing, A. J.Why don't the British treat more patients with kidney failure? British Medical Journal, 1983, 287, 1157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Challah, S., & Wing, A. J. The epidemiology of genito-urinary disease. In The Oxford textbook of public health. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press, 1984, (in press).Google Scholar