...
首页> 外文期刊>Health economics, policy, and law. >Access to treatment and the constitutional right to health in Germany: a triumph of hope over evidence?
【24h】

Access to treatment and the constitutional right to health in Germany: a triumph of hope over evidence?

机译:在德国获得待遇和宪法权利:对证据的希望胜利?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Health technology assessment is frequently credited with making difficult resource allocation decisions in health care fairer, more rational and more transparent. In Germany, a constitutional 'right to health' allows patients to challenge decisions by sickness funds to withhold reimbursement of treatment excluded from public funding because of insufficient evidence of effectiveness. The ability to litigate was qualified by the Constitutional Court in its 2005 'Nikolaus decision' that sets out criteria to be applied to these cases. Treatment must be made available if (1) the condition is life-threatening, (2) no alternative treatment is available and (3) there is an indication that the treatment could benefit the patient. This paper examines how courts struggled to apply these criteria based on an analysis of cases of patients who sought treatment for cancer between 2005 and 2015, and explores the implications of applying a constitutional 'right to health' to treatment decisions.
机译:健康技术评估经常被认为是在医疗保健公平,更合理和更透明的难以进行资源分配决策。 在德国,宪法的“健康权”使患者患者犯罪基金的决策,以扣留偿还从公共资金不足的治疗,因为有效的证据不足。 诉讼能力在2005年的“尼古拉决定”中的宪法法院有资格,规定了适用于这些案件的标准。 如果(1)条件是危及危及生命的情况 本文研究了法院如何根据对2005年至2015年期间寻求癌症治疗患者的患者的分析来努力应用这些标准,并探讨将宪法“卫生权利”应用于治疗决策的含义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号