Schoene-Seifert Bettina, Huster Stefan, Harney Anke, Friedrich Daniel R
Institute for Ethics, History and Theory of Medicine, University of Munster, Munster, Deutschland.
Institut für Sozial- und Gesundheitsrecht, Ruhr-Universität Bochum, Bochum, Deutschland.
Gesundheitswesen. 2022 Jun;84(6):490-494. doi: 10.1055/a-1690-7284. Epub 2022 Jun 8.
The concept of a 'medical necessity' (medN) of interventions is used as a dichotomous attribute with steering and orientating function in various contexts without, however, being precisely defined. We see this lack as a virtue if medN is understood as the dynamic result of transparent, trustworthy, and coherent deliberative procedures on both facts and norms. We suggest using the medN concept relative to health care systems, but independent of economic aspects.
干预措施的“医疗必要性”(medN)概念在各种背景下被用作具有指导和定向功能的二分属性,然而,它并未得到精确界定。如果将medN理解为关于事实和规范的透明、可信且连贯的审议程序的动态结果,我们认为这种缺乏是一种优点。我们建议相对于医疗保健系统使用medN概念,但独立于经济方面。