Minnesota public opinion on health care resource allocation

Creating workable policies for allocating or rationing finite health care resources to meet the needs of individuals as well as the broader society vexes policymakers, providers, and consumers. This paper presents results of a March 1994 Lou Harris survey of 1,006 Minnesotans about health care allocation. Minnesotans believe that allocative or rationing decisions are inevitable and can be discussed. Individualized bedside allocative decisions are preferable to categorical or universal exclusions of some health care benefits. People want comprehensive health care and are willing to let sound clinical judgment, perhaps informed by practice guidelines, selectively withhold some services. The integrity of plan-based allocation or rationing may be best secured and safeguarded by standards that ensure that the decisions are based on patients' best interests, involve trusted clinical decision makers, and include lay participation in the decision making.