Objective: To provide an ethical analysis of whether the Ethiopian and Tanzanian national HIV/AIDS treatment guidelines can be considered legitimate and fair rationing tools.
Method: Qualitative study and ethical analysis involving guideline documents and interviews with nine key members involved in the development of the guidelines. The analysis followed an editing organising style. The theoretical framework was a guideline-specific framework based on theories of just resource allocation in healthcare and conditions that ensure fair processes in guideline development. According to this framework, legitimate rationing requires reasons for patient selection to be explicit, public and relevant, and decisions must be open to question and revision.
Results: The only explicit rationing criteria that both guidelines recommended were clinical antiretroviral treatment indications. Explicit non-clinical rationing criteria were expressed in a separate Ethiopian implementation guideline. Neither of the guideline development processes fully satisfies minimal requirements of procedural fairness. There is a lack of transparency. The reasons for decisions are rarely given and are not publicly available. This reduces the opportunity for public questioning, debate and revisions. The guidelines were based on expert opinion and consensus. Recommendations from the WHO were copied without much discussion, disagreement or adjustment.
Conclusions: The two national HIV treatment guidelines discussed are de facto mechanisms for rationing but were developed using methods that do not fully satisfy the requirements of fair processes.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
Funding: Johansson and Jerene received funding from the University of Bergen, Norway, and Norheim from a Young Investigator Award, Norwegian Research Council, Norway. The funding sources had no influence on the study design.
Competing interests: None.
Ethics approval: This study involved interviews with guideline developers and official guideline documents and did not involve patients or sensitive information about patients and therefore did not require ethics approval. Oral informed consent was collected and the interviewees were informed about the purpose of the study. Confidentiality and anonymity were assured in analysis and reporting of statements.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Institutionalising an evidence-informed approach to guideline development: progress and challenges at the World Health Organization
- Longitudinal effect following initiation of highly active antiretroviral therapy on plasma and cervico-vaginal HIV-1 RNA among women in Burkina Faso
- World Health Organization and knowledge translation in maternal, newborn, child and adolescent health and nutrition
- Use of indirect evidence from HIV self-testing to inform the WHO hepatitis C self-testing recommendation
- Associations between highly active antiretroviral therapy and the presence of HPV, premalignant and malignant cervical lesions in sub-Saharan Africa, a systematic review: current evidence and directions for future research
- Expanding antiretroviral therapy in Malawi: drawing on the country's experience with tuberculosis
- Simplifying TREAtment and Monitoring for HIV (STREAM HIV): protocol for a randomised controlled trial of point-of-care urine tenofovir and viral load testing to improve HIV outcomes
- The availability of global guidance for the promotion of women’s, newborns’, children’s and adolescents’ health and nutrition in conflicts
- The relation of price of antiretroviral drugs and foreign assistance with coverage of HIV treatment in Africa: retrospective study
- Healthcare providers’ perspectives on use of the national guideline for family planning services in Amhara Region, Ethiopia: a qualitative study