Rosén Per
Avd för verksamhetsutveckling, Hälso-och sjukvårdsledningen, Regionhuset, Baravägen 1, 221 00 Lund, Sweden.
Health Policy. 2006 Nov;79(1):107-16. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2005.11.015. Epub 2006 Jan 18.
The Swedish public healthcare sector is administered by county councils or regions with their own power of taxation. These authorities are facing difficult times as the gap between demand and healthcare resources is widening and the option to further increase county council taxes is not politically tempting. It is becoming ever more apparent that, sooner or later, limits to the public healthcare commitment must be set. In the north-western district of Region Skåne, the district board determined to initiate a public dialogue on prioritisation with local residents. Annual surveys were sent to 1% of the population ( approximately 2500 individuals) during the period 2002-2004. The addressees were also asked if they wanted to participate in public meetings with the healthcare politicians. This study investigates what happened to the preferences and attitudes of the interest group when the participants were not only offered an opportunity to enter into a dialogue with their peers and representatives, but also received information on prioritisation matters. After the intervention, which consisted of two public meetings with politicians and five information booklets on prioritisation issues, the study group was asked to participate in a second survey. At the follow-up, 20% fewer thought that one should always have a right to public healthcare, even if troubles were trivial. Eighty four percent in the study group thought that the general public should participate in prioritisation discussions while only 64% in the control group agreed to this. Eighty two percent of the study group marked the dialogue project "good" or "very good". The results indicate an increased acceptance for reallocations, a strengthened will to participate and more confidence in the politicians and their work. The study is descriptive and designed to make long-term follow-ups possible.
瑞典公共医疗保健部门由拥有自身征税权的郡议会或地区管理。这些当局正面临困境,因为需求与医疗资源之间的差距在不断扩大,而进一步提高郡议会税收的选择在政治上并不具有吸引力。越来越明显的是,迟早必须对公共医疗保健投入设限。在斯科讷地区的西北区,区委员会决定与当地居民就优先事项展开公开对话。在2002年至2004年期间,每年向1%的人口(约2500人)发送调查问卷。还询问收件人是否愿意参加与医疗保健方面的政治家举行的公开会议。本研究调查了当参与者不仅有机会与同行和代表进行对话,还收到有关优先事项的信息时,该利益集团的偏好和态度发生了什么变化。在进行了两次与政治家的公开会议以及发放了五份关于优先事项问题的信息手册的干预措施之后,研究小组被要求参加第二次调查。在随访时,认为即使病情轻微也始终有权享受公共医疗保健的人数减少了20%。研究小组中有84%的人认为普通公众应该参与优先事项的讨论,而对照组中只有64%的人同意这一点。82%的研究小组成员将对话项目评为“好”或“非常好”。结果表明对重新分配的接受度有所提高,参与意愿增强,对政治家及其工作更有信心。该研究是描述性的,旨在进行长期随访。