Health Intervention and Technology Assessment Program (HITAP), Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.
Health Res Policy Syst. 2012 Feb 17;10:6. doi: 10.1186/1478-4505-10-6.
A wide range of preventive, treatment, and care programs for HIV/AIDS are currently available and some of them have been implemented in Thailand. Policy makers are now facing challenges on how the scarce resources for HIV/AIDS control can be spent more wisely. Although effectiveness and cost-effectiveness information is useful for guiding policy decisions, empirical evidence indicates the importance of other criteria, such as equity and the characteristics of the target population, also play important roles in priority setting. This study aims to experiment with the use of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) to prioritise interventions in HIV/AIDS control in Thailand.
We used MCDA to rank 40 HIV/AIDS interventions on the basis of the priority setting criteria put forward by three groups of stakeholders including policy makers, people living with HIV/AIDs (PLWHA), and village health volunteers (VHVs). MCDA incorporated an explicit component of deliberation to let stakeholders reflect on the rank ordering, and adapt where necessary.
Upon deliberation, policy makers expressed a preference for programs that target high risk groups such as men who have sex with men, injecting drug users, and female sex workers. The VHVs preferred interventions that target the youth or the general population, and gave lower priority to programs that target high risk groups. PLWHA gave all interventions the same priority. The rank order correlation between the priorities as expressed before and after deliberation was 37% among the policy makers and 46% among the VHVs.
This study documented the feasibility of MCDA to prioritize HIV/AIDS interventions in Thailand, and has shown the usefulness of a deliberative process as an integrated component of MCDA. MCDA holds potential to contribute to a more transparent and accountable priority setting process, and further application of this approach in the prioritisation of health interventions is warranted.
目前有广泛的预防、治疗和护理艾滋病毒/艾滋病的方案,其中一些方案已在泰国实施。政策制定者现在面临着如何更明智地利用艾滋病毒/艾滋病控制的稀缺资源的挑战。尽管有效性和成本效益信息有助于指导政策决策,但实证证据表明,公平性和目标人群的特征等其他标准也在优先事项设定中起着重要作用。本研究旨在尝试使用多准则决策分析(MCDA)对泰国艾滋病毒/艾滋病控制中的干预措施进行优先排序。
我们使用 MCDA 根据政策制定者、艾滋病毒感染者/艾滋病患者(PLWHA)和乡村卫生志愿者(VHVs)三组利益相关者提出的优先顺序标准,对 40 种艾滋病毒/艾滋病干预措施进行排名。MCDA 纳入了一个明确的审议组成部分,让利益相关者反思排名顺序,并在必要时进行调整。
在审议过程中,政策制定者表示更倾向于针对高危人群的计划,如男男性行为者、注射毒品者和性工作者。VHVs 更倾向于针对青年或一般人群的干预措施,对针对高危人群的计划给予较低的优先级。PLWHA 对所有干预措施给予相同的优先级。在审议前后表达的优先顺序之间的等级相关系数在政策制定者中为 37%,在 VHVs 中为 46%。
本研究记录了 MCDA 在泰国优先考虑艾滋病毒/艾滋病干预措施的可行性,并展示了审议过程作为 MCDA 综合组成部分的有用性。MCDA 有可能为更透明和负责任的优先事项制定过程做出贡献,进一步在卫生干预措施的优先排序中应用这种方法是合理的。