Priority setting (also known as resource allocation or rationing) occurs at every level of every health system and is one of the most significant health care policy questions of the 21st century. Because it is so prevalent and context specific, improving priority setting in a health system entails improving it in the institutions that constitute the system. But, how should this be done? Normative approaches are necessary because they help identify key values that clarify policy choices, but insufficient because different approaches lead to different conclusions and there is no consensus about which ones are correct, and they are too abstract to be directly used in actual decision making. Empirical approaches are necessary because they help to identify what is being done and what can be done, but are insufficient because they cannot identify what should be done. Moreover, to be really helpful, an improvement strategy must utilize rigorous research methods that are able to analyze and capture experience so that past problems are corrected and lessons can be shared with others. Therefore, a constructive, practical and accessible improvement strategy must be research-based and combine both normative and empirical methods. In this paper we propose a research-based improvement strategy that involves combining three linked methods: case study research to describe priority setting; interdisciplinary research to evaluate the description using an ethical framework; and action research to improve priority setting. This describe-evaluate-improve strategy is a generalizable method that can be used in different health care institutions to improve priority setting in that context.

Early increased ICP is a common presentation of severe pediatric TBI during pre-trauma center management. However, what constitutes optimal care remains unknown. Given the difficulties of diagnosing early increased ICP in this setting, prophylactic raising ICP-lowering strategies may be considered.

ObjectivePrehospital blood transfusion has been adopted by many civilian helicopter emergency medical services agencies, and early outcomes are positive. The Shock Trauma Air Rescue Society operates six bases in Western Canada and started a blood on board process in 2013 in Regina that has expanded to all bases. Two units of O negative packed red blood cells are carried on every mission. We describe the processes and standard work ensuring safe storage, administration, and stewardship of this important resource.MethodsThe packed red blood cells are stored in an inexpensive, reusable temperature controlled cooler at 1°C–6°C. Close collaboration with local transfusion services and adherence to Canadian transfusion standards contributes to safety and sustainability.ResultsFrom October 1, 2013 to October 10, 2017, the Shock Trauma Air Rescue Society administered blood to 431 patients. Of this total, 62.9% received blood carried on our aircraft. A total of 463 blood box units were administered, and the majority of patients (69.0%) received both units. Blood used in Calgary, Alberta was 100% traceable, and only 1.2% of total units dispensed was wasted. The vast majority of unused units were returned to circulation.ConclusionWe describe the process to set up and monitor a prehospital blood transfusion program. Our standard work and stewardship processes minimize wastage of blood while keeping it readily available for our critically ill and injured patients.

Public support for arrangements that limit access to new technologies will likely vary depending on the details of the specific arrangement being proposed. Deliberative public dialogue can be effectively used to identify cases the general public is most likely to support.

No abstract