Suppr超能文献

基于证据的差异:审视健康期望与体验之间的差距。

Evidence-based disparities: examining the gap between health expectations and experiences.

作者信息

Vashdi Dana R, Zalmanovitch Yair

机构信息

LecturerSenior Lecturer, Division of Public Administration and Policy, School of political Sciences, University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2014 Aug;17(4):593-601. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2012.00790.x. Epub 2012 Jun 28.

Abstract

CONTEXT

In a time of economic austerity, one of the most daunting questions is who decides on healthcare rationing? In the current study, we sought to examine if the public can in fact provide meaningful information regarding healthcare policy issues. Based on theories of public policy, this paper tries to find out if patients behave akin to 'responsible citizens' and can provide differentiated expectations between three healthcare dimensions.

METHODS

One thousand two-hundred eleven individuals participated in a telephone interview. Participants were asked two series of questions, one regarding their views on the primary care, prevention and promotion practices they experience with their healthcare provider and one regarding the importance of these practices to them. We calculated a difference score representing the gap in each healthcare dimension.

FINDINGS

In all three healthcare dimensions, the mean gap is in the positive side of the axis indicating that the public does not receive what it expects to receive, or in policy terms there is 'a responsiveness deficit'. The mean gap in relation to primary care is significantly lower than the mean gap in both preventive care and health promotion.

CONCLUSIONS

The public can provide meaningful information even in areas of endless demand and can provide an addition point of view to be considered by policy makers in complicated healthcare rationing decisions.

摘要

背景

在经济紧缩时期,最令人望而生畏的问题之一是谁来决定医疗资源的分配?在当前的研究中,我们试图检验公众是否实际上能够提供有关医疗政策问题的有意义信息。基于公共政策理论,本文试图弄清楚患者的行为是否类似于“有责任感的公民”,以及能否在三个医疗维度之间提供不同的期望。

方法

1211个人参与了电话访谈。参与者被问及两组问题,一组是关于他们对与医疗服务提供者的初级保健、预防和促进措施的看法,另一组是关于这些措施对他们的重要性。我们计算了一个差异分数,代表每个医疗维度的差距。

结果

在所有三个医疗维度中,平均差距都在坐标轴的正值一侧,这表明公众没有得到他们期望得到的东西,或者从政策角度来说,存在“响应不足”。与初级保健相关的平均差距明显低于预防保健和健康促进方面的平均差距。

结论

即使在需求无止境的领域,公众也能提供有意义的信息,并能为政策制定者在复杂的医疗资源分配决策中提供一个额外的考虑视角。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

3
Who should be involved in health care decision making? A qualitative study.谁应该参与医疗保健决策?一项定性研究。
Health Care Anal. 2008 Jun;16(2):114-26. doi: 10.1007/s10728-007-0051-y. Epub 2007 Jun 26.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验