Open Society Foundations (D.L.), New York, USA; Open Society Institute AF Tajikistan (N.A.), Dushanbe, Tajikistan; Open Society Foundations-Armenia (D.A.), Yerevan, Armenia; Soros Foundation Moldova (L.G.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; Open Society Georgia Foundation (N.K.); Ilia State University, Tblisi, Georgia; Real World Real People (Z.M.), Yerevan, Armenia; Open Society Foundations-Armenia (A.P.), Yerevan, Armenia; Open Society Foundations (S.P.), New York, USA; International Renaissance Foundation (K.S.), Kyiv, Ukraine; Soros Foundation Moldova (V.S.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; Center for Health Policies and Studies (G.T.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; International Renaissance Foundation (V.T.), Kyiv, Ukraine; Center for Rights Development (V.Z.), Yerevan, Armenia.
Open Society Foundations (D.L.), New York, USA; Open Society Institute AF Tajikistan (N.A.), Dushanbe, Tajikistan; Open Society Foundations-Armenia (D.A.), Yerevan, Armenia; Soros Foundation Moldova (L.G.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; Open Society Georgia Foundation (N.K.); Ilia State University, Tblisi, Georgia; Real World Real People (Z.M.), Yerevan, Armenia; Open Society Foundations-Armenia (A.P.), Yerevan, Armenia; Open Society Foundations (S.P.), New York, USA; International Renaissance Foundation (K.S.), Kyiv, Ukraine; Soros Foundation Moldova (V.S.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; Center for Health Policies and Studies (G.T.), Chisinau, Republic of Moldova; International Renaissance Foundation (V.T.), Kyiv, Ukraine; Center for Rights Development (V.Z.), Yerevan, Armenia.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Aug;64(2):100-109. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.04.177. Epub 2022 Apr 27.
In the early 2000s, palliative care was largely unknown in the Eurasian region. For a period of twenty years starting around 2002, Open Society Foundations (OSF) supported palliative care pioneers in the region to establish palliative care services, train health providers, and advocate for the integration into health services.
To report on the development of palliative care in Armenia, Georgia, Moldova, Tajikistan and Ukraine during the period 2017-2021 and explore the impact of OSF's sustained funding for palliative care in these countries. Activities and developments to 2017 were described in country-specific papers in 2018.
A retrospective case study analysis was used to examine how palliative care developed in each country. We reviewed theories of change, funding and advocacy strategies, implemented activities and interventions, and their outputs and outcomes, and compared them to legal, policy and service developments in practice.
By the mid-2010s, each country had laid the foundations for rolling out palliative care-basic policies and guidelines were in place; palliative care medications were available; key health providers were trained; and training capacity and models of care had been created-but service availability remained limited. In subsequent years, advocates increasingly embraced public advocacy to hold governments accountable for meeting their commitments and to include palliative care in universal health insurance. By 2021, Armenia, Moldova, and Ukraine had significantly scaled up service availability and palliative care was firmly embedded in universal health coverage in Moldova and Ukraine whereas progress in Georgia and Tajikistan was more modest.
Experiences in these countries suggest that a strategy that initially emphasizes training, technical assistance, and engagement to create the building blocks for palliative care combined with or followed by public advocacy and campaigning to demand roll out of services can result in significant advances. Continued progress, however, is not guaranteed, especially considering the COVID-19 pandemic and dwindling donor support.
在 21 世纪初,缓和医疗在欧亚地区鲜为人知。自 2002 年前后开始的 20 年间,开放社会基金会(OSF)支持该地区的缓和医疗先驱者建立缓和医疗服务、培训医疗服务提供者,并倡导将其纳入医疗服务体系。
报告 2017 年至 2021 年间亚美尼亚、格鲁吉亚、摩尔多瓦、塔吉克斯坦和乌克兰的缓和医疗发展情况,并探讨 OSF 对这些国家持续提供的缓和医疗资金支持所产生的影响。2018 年发表了各国具体情况的论文,介绍了 2017 年之前的活动和发展情况。
采用回顾性案例研究分析方法,研究每个国家的缓和医疗是如何发展的。我们审查了变革理论、资金和倡导策略、实施的活动和干预措施,以及它们的产出和成果,并将其与实际中的法律、政策和服务发展进行了比较。
到 2010 年代中期,每个国家都为推广缓和医疗奠定了基础——基本政策和指导方针已经到位;缓和医疗药物已经可用;关键医疗服务提供者已经接受了培训;培训能力和护理模式已经建立——但服务的可及性仍然有限。在随后的几年里,倡导者越来越多地采取公共宣传,要求政府履行承诺,将缓和医疗纳入全民健康保险。到 2021 年,亚美尼亚、摩尔多瓦和乌克兰已经显著扩大了服务的可及性,缓和医疗已经在摩尔多瓦和乌克兰的全民健康保险中得到了牢固的嵌入,而格鲁吉亚和塔吉克斯坦的进展则较为温和。
这些国家的经验表明,最初强调培训、技术援助和参与,为缓和医疗奠定基础,再结合或紧随其后的公共宣传和运动,要求推出服务,可以取得重大进展。然而,持续的进展并不能得到保证,特别是考虑到 COVID-19 大流行和捐助者支持的减少。