Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1338963
 
 

Citations (1)



 
 

Footnotes (346)



 


 



In Tepid Defense of Population Health: Physicians and Antibiotic Resistance


Richard S. Saver


University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law


American Journal of Law & Medicine, Vol. 34, p. 431, 2008
U of Houston Law Center No. 1338963
UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1338963

Abstract:     
Antibiotic resistance menaces the population as a dire public health threat and costly social problem. Recent proposals to combat antibiotic resistance focus to a large degree on supply side approaches. Suggestions include tinkering with patent rights so that pharmaceutical companies have greater incentives to discover novel antibiotics as well as to resist overselling their newer drugs already on market. This Article argues that a primarily supply side emphasis unfortunately detracts attention from physicians' important demand side influences. Physicians have a vital and unavoidably necessary role to play in ensuring socially optimal access to antibiotics. Dismayingly, physicians' management of the antibiotic supply has been poor and their defense of population health tepid at best. Acting as a prudent steward of the antibiotic supply often seems to be at odds with a physician's commonly understood fiduciary duties, ethical obligations, and professional norms, all of which traditionally emphasize the individual health paradigm as opposed to population health responsibilities. Meanwhile, physicians face limited incentives for antibiotic conservation from other sources, such as malpractice liability, regulatory standards, and reimbursement systems. While multifaceted efforts are needed to combat antibiotic resistance effectively, physician gatekeeping behavior should become a priority area of focus.

This Article considers how health law and policy tools could favorably change the incentives physicians face for antibiotic conservation. A clear lesson from the managed care reform battles of the recent past is that interventions, to have the best chance of success, need to respect physician interest in clinical autonomy and individualized medicine even if, somewhat paradoxically, vigorously promoting population health perspectives. Also, physicians' legal and ethical obligations need to be reconceptualized in the antibiotic context in order to better support gatekeeping in defense of population health. The principal recommendation is for increased use of financial incentives to reward physicians for compliance with recommended guidelines on antibiotic prescribing. Although not a panacea, greater experimentation with financial incentives can provide a much needed jump-start to physician interest in antibiotic conservation and likely best address physicians' legitimate clinical autonomy concerns.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 61

Keywords: antibiotics, antibiotic resistance, physicians, financial incentives, public health, population health, patent

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 6, 2009 ; Last revised: March 9, 2009

Suggested Citation

Saver, Richard S., In Tepid Defense of Population Health: Physicians and Antibiotic Resistance. American Journal of Law & Medicine, Vol. 34, p. 431, 2008; U of Houston Law Center No. 1338963; UNC Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1338963. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1338963

Contact Information

Richard S. Saver (Contact Author)
University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill - School of Law ( email )
Van Hecke-Wettach Hall, 160 Ridge Road
CB #3380
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3380
United States

Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 929
Downloads: 72
Download Rank: 190,569
Citations:  1
Footnotes:  346

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo1 in 0.297 seconds