0
We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
Retry
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Viewpoint |

Why the Ethics of Parsimonious Medicine Is Not the Ethics of Rationing

Jon C. Tilburt, MD; Christine K. Cassel, MD
JAMA. 2013;309(8):773-774. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.368.
Text Size: A A A
Published online

Extract

The ethics of rationing health care resources has been debated for decades. Opponents of rationing are concerned that societal interests will supplant respect for individual patient choice and professional judgment. Advocates argue that injustices in the current system necessitate that physicians use resources prudently on behalf of society, even in their daily work with individual patients. The debate is important, potentially divisive, and unavoidable.

Various groups have championed the cause of medicine practiced leanly, consistent with the professional responsibility to use resources wisely. These initiatives, which champion “parsimonious medicine,”1 have highlighted the 20% of routine practices in US medicine that add no demonstrable value to health care but that persist in the inertia and rituals of clinical work.2 The specialty societies and the Choosing Wisely collaborative3 outline commonsense principles for avoiding unnecessary, wasteful care.

Topics

ethics

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview

Figures

Tables

References

Letters

June 5, 2013
David A. Fleming, MD, MA; Lois Snyder Sulmasy, JD
JAMA. 2013;309(21):2209-2210. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.5570.
June 5, 2013
Jon Tilburt, MD; Christine Cassel, MD
JAMA. 2013;309(21):2209-2210. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.5573.
CME
Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.

Multimedia

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Web of Science® Times Cited: 16

Sign in

Create a free personal account to sign up for alerts, share articles, and more.

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles
Jobs
brightcove.createExperiences();