• 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

患者作为政策问题:医疗保健中关键界面的模糊认知。

The patient as a policy problem: Ambiguous perceptions of a critical interface in healthcare.

机构信息

Linköping University, Sweden.

出版信息

Health (London). 2022 Nov;26(6):681-701. doi: 10.1177/1363459320976757. Epub 2020 Dec 8.

DOI:10.1177/1363459320976757
PMID:33291983
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9500173/
Abstract

The interface between the patient and the health service has changed, which constitutes a potential problem for various policy-makers. Using a critical policy perspective and drawing on the theory of problem framing, this paper explores how actor groups with different responsibilities perceive the patient as a constructed policy problem. This is a qualitative study where data consists of single episode interviews with healthcare politicians, senior administrators, service strategists, and unit mangers from one regional health authority in Sweden. A thematic content analysis of the interviews was carried out in accordance with "the framework approach". The study illustrates how the actors interpret their reality using diverse problem frames. This becomes more visible when the framing is disentangled with regard to what perspective they employ in relation to different accounts: society or the individual, or the (healthcare) system or the (healthcare) professional. The actor groups are part of the same institutional context, which explains certain tendencies of similarities in terms of the accounts being used, but still they approach the constructed problem differently which is visible as shifts-scaling up and down-between different accounts. By analyzing and structuring the various problem frames (including its policy styles) we can enhance our knowledge about how those responsible for the governance of healthcare approach the patient as a policy problem, as something that concerns only the patient and/or the provider, or as something that needs to be addressed in broader strategic terms.

摘要

医患关系发生了变化,这对各类政策制定者构成了潜在问题。本文运用批判性政策视角,并借鉴问题构建理论,探讨了具有不同责任的行为群体如何将患者视为构建政策问题。这是一项定性研究,数据由瑞典一个地区卫生当局的医疗保健政治家、高级管理人员、服务策略师和单位经理的单次访谈组成。根据“框架方法”对访谈进行了主题内容分析。研究表明,行为者如何使用不同的问题框架来解释他们的现实。当根据他们在不同账户中使用的视角(社会或个人,或系统或专业人员)来分解框架时,这种解释就更加明显了。这些行为群体属于同一制度背景,这可以解释在使用的账户方面存在某些相似趋势的原因,但他们仍然以不同的方式处理构建的问题,这表现在不同账户之间的上下波动(缩放)。通过分析和构建各种问题框架(包括其政策风格),我们可以更好地了解负责医疗保健治理的人员如何将患者视为政策问题,是仅与患者和/或提供者有关的问题,还是需要从更广泛的战略角度解决的问题。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/343a/9500173/8aded8c47501/10.1177_1363459320976757-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/343a/9500173/8aded8c47501/10.1177_1363459320976757-fig1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/343a/9500173/8aded8c47501/10.1177_1363459320976757-fig1.jpg

相似文献

1
The patient as a policy problem: Ambiguous perceptions of a critical interface in healthcare.患者作为政策问题:医疗保健中关键界面的模糊认知。
Health (London). 2022 Nov;26(6):681-701. doi: 10.1177/1363459320976757. Epub 2020 Dec 8.
2
Perspectives of Policy Makers and Service Users Concerning the Implementation of eHealth in Sweden: Interview Study.政策制定者和服务使用者对瑞典电子健康实施的看法:访谈研究。
J Med Internet Res. 2022 Jan 28;24(1):e28870. doi: 10.2196/28870.
3
Divergent notions of "quality" in healthcare policy implementation: a framing perspective.医疗政策实施中“质量”观念的分歧:一个框架视角。
J Health Organ Manag. 2021 Jan 7;ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print). doi: 10.1108/JHOM-09-2020-0370.
4
Scaling up population health interventions from decision to sustainability - a window of opportunity? A qualitative view from policy-makers.扩大从决策到可持续性的人群健康干预措施——一个机遇之窗?政策制定者的定性观点。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2020 Oct 9;18(1):118. doi: 10.1186/s12961-020-00636-3.
5
Understanding frailty: a qualitative study of European healthcare policy-makers' approaches to frailty screening and management.理解衰弱:一项关于欧洲医疗政策制定者对衰弱筛查与管理方法的定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2018 Jan 13;8(1):e018653. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-018653.
6
The challenges of implementing national policies to contain antibiotic resistance in Swedish healthcare-A qualitative study of perceptions among healthcare professionals.实施国家政策以遏制瑞典医疗保健领域抗生素耐药性的挑战——医疗保健专业人员认知的定性研究。
PLoS One. 2020 May 20;15(5):e0233236. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233236. eCollection 2020.
7
A qualitative systematic review of internal and external influences on shared decision-making in all health care settings.对所有医疗环境中共同决策的内部和外部影响进行的定性系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2012;10(58):4633-4646. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2012-432.
8
Adopting standardized cancer patient pathways as a policy at different organizational levels in the Swedish Health System.在瑞典卫生系统的不同组织层面采用标准化的癌症患者路径作为政策。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2023 Nov 27;21(1):122. doi: 10.1186/s12961-023-01073-8.
9
"There is total silence here" Ethical competence and inter-organizational learning in healthcare governance.“这里完全是一片寂静”——医疗保健治理中的伦理能力与组织间学习。
J Health Organ Manag. 2019 Nov 19;34(1):53-70. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-05-2019-0130.
10
Assessing policy-makers', academics' and experts' satisfaction with the performance of the Palestinian health research system: a qualitative study.评估政策制定者、学者和专家对巴勒斯坦卫生研究系统绩效的满意度:一项定性研究。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2018 Jul 25;16(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12961-018-0341-x.

引用本文的文献

1
Balancing competing rationales in priority-setting in primary healthcare - an interview study on political governance.基层医疗保健资源分配中平衡相互冲突的基本原理——一项关于政治治理的访谈研究
J Health Organ Manag. 2025 Feb 18;39(9):124-138. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-10-2024-0438.

本文引用的文献

1
Value judgment of health interventions from different perspectives: arguments and criteria.从不同视角对健康干预措施的价值判断:论据与标准
Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2018 Apr 17;16:16. doi: 10.1186/s12962-018-0099-6. eCollection 2018.
2
Political strategies in difficult times - The "backstage" experience of Swedish politicians on formal priority setting in healthcare.艰难时期的政治策略——瑞典政治家在医疗保健正式优先事项设定方面的“幕后”经历
Soc Sci Med. 2016 Aug;163:63-70. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2016.06.046. Epub 2016 Jun 28.
3
Patient involvement in Danish health care.
丹麦医疗保健中的患者参与。
J Health Organ Manag. 2015;29(5):611-24. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-01-2015-0002.
4
Patient involvement in Europe--a comparative framework.欧洲的患者参与——一个比较框架。
J Health Organ Manag. 2015;29(5):546-55. doi: 10.1108/JHOM-05-2015-0078.
5
Structural patterns in Swedish health policy: a 30-year perspective.
Health Econ Policy Law. 2015 Apr;10(2):195-215. doi: 10.1017/S1744133114000292. Epub 2014 Jul 31.
6
Being 'rational' and being 'human': How National Health Service rationing decisions are constructed as rational by resource allocation panels.“理性”与“人性”:国民医疗服务体系的配给决策如何被资源分配小组构建为理性决策。
Health (London). 2014 Sep;18(5):441-57. doi: 10.1177/1363459313507586. Epub 2013 Nov 27.
7
Healthcare policies over the last 20 years: reforms and counter-reforms.过去 20 年的医疗政策:改革与反改革。
Health Policy. 2010 Apr;95(1):82-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2009.11.006. Epub 2009 Dec 5.
8
How medical specialists appraise three controversial health innovations: scientific, clinical and social arguments.医学专家如何评价三种有争议的健康创新:科学、临床和社会论点。
Sociol Health Illn. 2010 Jan;32(1):123-39. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01192.x. Epub 2009 Dec 3.
9
Evidence-based policymaking: a critique.循证决策:一种批判。
Perspect Biol Med. 2009 Spring;52(2):304-18. doi: 10.1353/pbm.0.0085.
10
Patients and doctors: reformulating the UK health policy community?患者与医生:重塑英国卫生政策界?
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Sep;57(5):927-36. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00461-6.