• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

团结协作与成本管理:瑞士公民对医疗保险覆盖范围的优先考虑因素。

Solidarity and cost management: Swiss citizens' reasons for priorities regarding health insurance coverage.

机构信息

Institute for Ethics, History, and the Humanities, Geneva University Medical School, Geneva, Switzerland.

Department of Bioethics, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.

出版信息

Health Expect. 2018 Oct;21(5):858-869. doi: 10.1111/hex.12680. Epub 2018 Apr 14.

DOI:10.1111/hex.12680
PMID:29654652
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6186533/
Abstract

CONTEXT

Approaches to priority-setting for scarce resources have shifted to public deliberation as trade-offs become more difficult. We report results of a qualitative analysis of public deliberation in Switzerland, a country with high health-care costs, an individual health insurance mandate and a strong tradition of direct democracy with frequent votes related to health care.

METHODS

We adapted the Choosing Healthplans All Together (CHAT) tool, an exercise developed to transform complex health-care allocation decisions into easily understandable choices, for use in Switzerland. We conducted focus groups in twelve Swiss cities, recruiting from a range of socio-economic backgrounds in the three language regions.

FINDINGS

Participants developed strategic arguments based on the importance of basic coverage for all, and of cost-benefit evaluation. They also expressed arguments relying on a principle of solidarity, in particular the importance of protection for vulnerable groups, and on the importance of medical care. They struggled with the place of personal responsibility in coverage decisions. In commenting on the exercise, participants found the degree of consensus despite differing opinions surprising and valuable.

CONCLUSION

The Swiss population is particularly attentive to the costs of health care and means of reducing these costs. Swiss citizens are capable of making trade-offs and setting priorities for complex health issues.

摘要

背景

随着权衡变得更加困难,稀缺资源的优先排序方法已经转向公众讨论。我们报告了瑞士公众讨论的定性分析结果,瑞士是一个医疗费用高、实行个人医疗保险强制要求、具有直接民主传统且经常就医疗保健进行投票的国家。

方法

我们对 Choosing Healthplans All Together(CHAT)工具进行了改编,该工具是为了将复杂的医疗保健分配决策转化为易于理解的选择而开发的,用于瑞士。我们在瑞士的 12 个城市进行了焦点小组讨论,从三个语言区的不同社会经济背景中招募参与者。

发现

参与者根据所有人基本覆盖的重要性以及成本效益评估制定了策略性论点。他们还表达了依赖团结原则的论点,特别是弱势群体保护的重要性以及医疗保健的重要性。他们在个人责任在覆盖决策中的地位上存在争议。在对该练习进行评论时,参与者发现尽管意见不同,但达成共识的程度令人惊讶和有价值。

结论

瑞士民众特别关注医疗保健的成本和降低这些成本的方法。瑞士公民能够为复杂的健康问题进行权衡和确定优先事项。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fa8c/6186533/81c43b998d69/HEX-21-858-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fa8c/6186533/81c43b998d69/HEX-21-858-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/fa8c/6186533/81c43b998d69/HEX-21-858-g001.jpg

相似文献

1
Solidarity and cost management: Swiss citizens' reasons for priorities regarding health insurance coverage.团结协作与成本管理:瑞士公民对医疗保险覆盖范围的优先考虑因素。
Health Expect. 2018 Oct;21(5):858-869. doi: 10.1111/hex.12680. Epub 2018 Apr 14.
2
Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage.瑞士 CHAT 研究:公民讨论瑞士医疗保险覆盖的优先事项。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Aug 1;7(8):746-754. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15.
3
Experience in the United States with public deliberation about health insurance benefits using the small group decision exercise, CHAT.美国运用小组决策练习“CHAT”进行关于医疗保险福利的公众审议的经验。
J Ambul Care Manage. 2010 Jul-Sep;33(3):205-14. doi: 10.1097/JAC.0b013e3181e56340.
4
Enhancing employee capacity to prioritize health insurance benefits.提高员工对健康保险福利进行优先级排序的能力。
Health Expect. 2007 Sep;10(3):236-47. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2007.00442.x.
5
Choosing Healthplans All Together: a deliberative exercise for allocating limited health care resources.共同选择健康计划:一项关于分配有限医疗资源的审议活动。
J Health Polit Policy Law. 2005 Aug;30(4):563-601. doi: 10.1215/03616878-30-4-563.
6
Moving towards social inclusion: Engaging rural voices in priority setting for health.迈向社会包容:让农村声音参与卫生重点事项设定。
Health Expect. 2024 Feb;27(1):e13895. doi: 10.1111/hex.13895. Epub 2023 Oct 26.
7
Assessing the impact of deliberative processes on the views of participants: is it 'in one ear and out the other'?评估审议过程对参与者观点的影响:是“一听了之”吗?
Health Expect. 2014 Apr;17(2):278-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00749.x. Epub 2012 Feb 2.
8
Citizens' juries in planning research priorities: process, engagement and outcome.规划研究重点中的公民陪审团:过程、参与度与结果
Health Expect. 2008 Sep;11(3):272-81. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2008.00502.x.
9
Tradeoff Negotiation: The Importance of Getting in the Game Comment on "Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage".权衡谈判:参与游戏的重要性 述评“瑞士-CHAT:公民讨论瑞士医疗保险覆盖范围的优先事项”。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Dec 1;7(12):1148-1150. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.86.
10
Will insured citizens give up benefit coverage to include the uninsured?参保公民会放弃福利覆盖范围来纳入未参保者吗?
J Gen Intern Med. 2004 Aug;19(8):868-74. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2004.32102.x.

引用本文的文献

1
Assessing clinical benefit in the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program: A 2-step approach for improving transparency, consistency, and meaningful patient engagement.评估医疗保险药品价格谈判计划中的临床获益:提高透明度、一致性和有意义的患者参与度的两步方法。
J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2024 Mar 1;30(3):252-258. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2024.23255. Epub 2024 Jan 19.
2
Engaging community members in setting priorities for nutrition interventions in rural northern Ghana.让加纳北部农村地区的社区成员参与确定营养干预措施的优先事项。
PLOS Glob Public Health. 2022 Sep 16;2(9):e0000447. doi: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0000447. eCollection 2022.
3

本文引用的文献

1
Individual Responsibility and Community Solidarity--The Swiss Health Care System.个人责任与社区团结——瑞士医疗体系
N Engl J Med. 2015 Dec 3;373(23):2193-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1508256.
2
Swiss popular initiative for a single health insurer… once again!瑞士关于单一健康保险公司的民众倡议……再次提出!
Health Policy. 2015 Jul;119(7):851-5. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.05.004. Epub 2015 May 14.
3
Just caring: assessing the ethical and economic costs of personalized medicine.仅仅是关怀:评估个性化医疗的伦理和经济成本。
Deliberative engagement methods on health care priority-setting in a rural South African community.
农村南非社区医疗优先事项设定的审议式参与方法。
Health Policy Plan. 2021 Sep 9;36(8):1279-1291. doi: 10.1093/heapol/czab005.
4
The long shadow of childhood cancer: a qualitative study on insurance hardship among survivors of childhood cancer.儿童癌症的长期阴影:一项关于儿童癌症幸存者保险困难的定性研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 May 25;21(1):503. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06543-9.
5
CHAT SA: Modification of a Public Engagement Tool for Priority Setting for a South African Rural Context.南非农村背景下优先事项设定的公众参与工具的修改。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Feb 1;11(2):197-209. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2020.110.
6
The Value of Engaging the Public in CHATing About Healthcare Priorities: A Response to Recent Commentaries.让公众参与讨论医疗保健优先事项的价值:对近期评论的回应。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2019 Apr 1;8(4):250-252. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.113.
7
Swiss-CHAT: Citizens Discuss Priorities for Swiss Health Insurance Coverage.瑞士 CHAT 研究:公民讨论瑞士医疗保险覆盖的优先事项。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2018 Aug 1;7(8):746-754. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2018.15.
Urol Oncol. 2014 Feb;32(2):202-6. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.09.013.
4
Experience in the United States with public deliberation about health insurance benefits using the small group decision exercise, CHAT.美国运用小组决策练习“CHAT”进行关于医疗保险福利的公众审议的经验。
J Ambul Care Manage. 2010 Jul-Sep;33(3):205-14. doi: 10.1097/JAC.0b013e3181e56340.
5
Personal responsibility for health as a rationing criterion: why we don't like it and why maybe we should.将个人健康责任作为一种配给标准:我们为何不喜欢它以及或许我们应该喜欢它的原因。
J Med Ethics. 2008 Dec;34(12):871-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.024059.
6
Accountability for reasonableness: an update.合理性问责制:最新情况
BMJ. 2008 Oct 9;337:a1850. doi: 10.1136/bmj.a1850.
7
Individual responsibility and solidarity in European health care: further down the road to two-tier system of health care.欧洲医疗保健中的个人责任与团结:迈向医疗保健双层体系的道路又向前迈进了一步。
J Med Philos. 2008 Jun;33(3):191-7. doi: 10.1093/jmp/jhn012.
8
Principles versus procedures in making health care coverage decisions: addressing inevitable conflicts.医疗保健覆盖范围决策中的原则与程序:应对不可避免的冲突
Theor Med Bioeth. 2008;29(2):73-85. doi: 10.1007/s11017-008-9062-4. Epub 2008 Jun 6.
9
Priority setting in health care: Lessons from the experiences of eight countries.医疗保健中的优先事项设定:八个国家经验教训。
Int J Equity Health. 2008 Jan 21;7:4. doi: 10.1186/1475-9276-7-4.
10
Low-income employees' choices regarding employment benefits aimed at improving the socioeconomic determinants of health.低收入员工在旨在改善健康的社会经济决定因素的就业福利方面的选择。
Am J Public Health. 2007 Sep;97(9):1650-7. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2006.091033. Epub 2007 Jul 31.