• 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

基本卫生服务一揽子计划决策过程:来自六个国家的经验。

Decision-making processes for essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.

机构信息

Department of Health Evidence, Radboudumc, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

Department of Global Public Health and Primary Care, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.

出版信息

BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010704.

DOI:10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010704
PMID:36657809
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9853142/
Abstract

Many countries around the world strive for universal health coverage, and an essential packages of health services (EPHS) is a central policy instrument for countries to achieve this. It defines the coverage of services that are made available, as well as the proportion of the costs that are covered from different financial schemes and who can receive these services. This paper reports on the development of an analytical framework on the decision-making process of EPHS revision, and the review of practices of six countries (Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Pakistan, Somalia, Sudan and Zanzibar-Tanzania).The analytical framework distinguishes the practical organisation, fairness and institutionalisation of decision-making processes. The review shows that countries: (1) largely follow a similar practical stepwise process but differ in their implementation of some steps, such as the choice of decision criteria; (2) promote fairness in their EPHS process by involving a range of stakeholders, which in the case of Zanzibar included patients and community members; (3) are transparent in terms of at least some of the steps of their decision-making process and (4) in terms of institutionalisation, express a high degree of political will for ongoing EPHS revision with almost all countries having a designated governing institute for EPHS revision.We advise countries to organise meaningful stakeholder involvement and foster the transparency of the decision-making process, as these are key to fairness in decision-making. We also recommend countries to take steps towards the institutionalisation of their EPHS revision process.

摘要

许多国家都在努力实现全民健康覆盖,基本医疗服务包(EPHS)是各国实现这一目标的核心政策工具。它定义了可提供的服务覆盖范围,以及不同财务计划所涵盖的费用比例和可以享受这些服务的人群。本文报告了一个关于 EPHS 修订决策过程的分析框架的开发情况,以及对六个国家(阿富汗、埃塞俄比亚、巴基斯坦、索马里、苏丹和桑给巴尔-坦桑尼亚)的实践审查。该分析框架区分了决策过程的实际组织、公平性和制度化。审查表明,各国:(1) 大体上遵循类似的实际逐步过程,但在实施某些步骤方面存在差异,例如决策标准的选择;(2) 通过涉及一系列利益相关者来促进 EPHS 过程中的公平性,在桑给巴尔的情况下,包括患者和社区成员;(3) 在决策过程的至少某些步骤中是透明的;(4) 在制度化方面,几乎所有国家都表达了对正在进行的 EPHS 修订的高度政治意愿,都有一个指定的 EPHS 修订管理机构。我们建议各国组织有意义的利益相关者参与,并促进决策过程的透明度,因为这是决策公平的关键。我们还建议各国采取措施将 EPHS 修订过程制度化。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f0aa/9853142/2b298964a952/bmjgh-2022-010704f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f0aa/9853142/2b298964a952/bmjgh-2022-010704f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/f0aa/9853142/2b298964a952/bmjgh-2022-010704f01.jpg

相似文献

1
Decision-making processes for essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.基本卫生服务一揽子计划决策过程:来自六个国家的经验。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010704.
2
The role of the private sector in delivering essential packages of health services: lessons from country experiences.私营部门在提供基本医疗服务包方面的作用:来自国家经验的教训。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010742.
3
The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Designing the Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan.利用循证决策过程设计巴基斯坦基本卫生服务包。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8004. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.8004. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
4
Monitoring and evaluating the implementation of essential packages of health services.监测和评估基本卫生服务包的实施情况。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Mar;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010726.
5
Addressing the UHC Challenge Using the Disease Control Priorities 3 Approach: Lessons Learned and an Overview of the Pakistan Experience.利用《疾病控制优先事项》第 3 版方法应对全民健康覆盖挑战:经验教训和巴基斯坦概况。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8003. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.8003. Epub 2023 Dec 16.
6
From Universal Health Coverage services packages to budget appropriation: the long journey to implementation.从全民健康覆盖服务包到预算拨款:漫长的实施之旅。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 May;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010755.
7
Using costing to facilitate policy making towards Universal Health Coverage: findings and recommendations from country-level experiences.利用成本核算为全民健康覆盖政策制定提供便利:来自国家层面经验的发现和建议。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010735.
8
Universal Health Coverage and Essential Packages of Care全民健康覆盖与基本医疗服务包
9
Country readiness and prerequisites for successful design and transition to implementation of essential packages of health services: experience from six countries.国家准备情况以及成功设计和过渡到基本卫生服务包实施的前提条件:来自六个国家的经验。
BMJ Glob Health. 2023 Jan;8(Suppl 1). doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2022-010720.
10
The Use of Evidence to Design an Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan: A Review and Analysis of Prioritisation Decisions at Different Stages of the Appraisal Process.利用证据为巴基斯坦设计基本医疗服务套餐:评价过程不同阶段优先排序决策的回顾与分析。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8043. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8043. Epub 2024 Mar 9.

引用本文的文献

1
Health Benefit Package Revision Is an Art as Much as a Science - Lessons Learned on the Organization of the Appraisal Phase.健康福利套餐修订既是一门科学,也是一门艺术——评估阶段组织工作的经验教训。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2025;14:8819. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.8819. Epub 2025 Mar 11.
2
A 10-Step Method for Fair Priority-Setting Processes: A Qualitative Case Study from Zanzibar.公平确定优先事项流程的十步法:来自桑给巴尔的定性案例研究
Health Syst Reform. 2025 Dec 31;11(1):2516903. doi: 10.1080/23288604.2025.2516903. Epub 2025 Jun 18.
3
Health service utilisation cost associated with residential fire incidents in New South Wales, Australia.

本文引用的文献

1
Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Health Benefit Package Design - Part II: A Practical Guide.循证决策过程用于医疗福利套餐设计 - 第二部分:实用指南。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2022 Oct 19;11(10):2327-2336. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2021.159. Epub 2021 Nov 10.
2
Toward universal health coverage in the post-COVID-19 era.在后 COVID-19 时代实现全民健康覆盖。
Nat Med. 2021 Mar;27(3):380-387. doi: 10.1038/s41591-021-01268-y. Epub 2021 Mar 15.
3
Multicriteria Decision Analysis to Support Health Technology Assessment Agencies: Benefits, Limitations, and the Way Forward.
澳大利亚新南威尔士州住宅火灾事故相关的医疗服务利用成本。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Mar 11;25(1):363. doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-12527-w.
4
An integrated framework to guide evidence-informed public health policymaking.一个指导基于证据的公共卫生政策制定的综合框架。
J Public Health Policy. 2025 Mar;46(1):193-210. doi: 10.1057/s41271-024-00535-9. Epub 2025 Jan 11.
5
Equity considerations for the implementation of health insurance benefit package in Ethiopia: result of expert Delphi exercise.埃塞俄比亚实施医疗保险福利包的公平性考虑:专家德尔菲法的结果。
Int J Equity Health. 2024 Sep 11;23(1):182. doi: 10.1186/s12939-024-02226-z.
6
Challenges in institutionalizing evidence-informed priority setting for health service packages: a qualitative document and interview analysis from Iran.将证据转化为健康服务套餐优先事项的制度化挑战:来自伊朗的定性文件和访谈分析。
Health Res Policy Syst. 2024 Aug 19;22(1):110. doi: 10.1186/s12961-024-01207-6.
7
Priority setting and migration health policies for European countries.欧洲国家的优先事项设定与移民健康政策。
Lancet Reg Health Eur. 2024 May 28;41:100804. doi: 10.1016/j.lanepe.2023.100804. eCollection 2024 Jun.
8
Addressing the UHC Challenge Using the Disease Control Priorities 3 Approach: Lessons Learned and an Overview of the Pakistan Experience.利用《疾病控制优先事项》第 3 版方法应对全民健康覆盖挑战:经验教训和巴基斯坦概况。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8003. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.8003. Epub 2023 Dec 16.
9
The Use of Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes for Designing the Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan.利用循证决策过程设计巴基斯坦基本卫生服务包。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8004. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2023.8004. Epub 2023 Oct 24.
10
The Use of Evidence to Design an Essential Package of Health Services in Pakistan: A Review and Analysis of Prioritisation Decisions at Different Stages of the Appraisal Process.利用证据为巴基斯坦设计基本医疗服务套餐:评价过程不同阶段优先排序决策的回顾与分析。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2024;13:8043. doi: 10.34172/ijhpm.2024.8043. Epub 2024 Mar 9.
多准则决策分析支持卫生技术评估机构:收益、限制和未来发展方向。
Value Health. 2019 Nov;22(11):1283-1288. doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.06.014. Epub 2019 Oct 16.
4
Priority setting in a context of insecurity, epidemiological transition and low financial risk protection, Afghanistan.阿富汗在不安全、流行病学转变和低金融风险保护背景下的优先事项设定
Bull World Health Organ. 2019 May 1;97(5):374-376. doi: 10.2471/BLT.18.218941. Epub 2019 Apr 1.
5
Priority Setting for Universal Health Coverage: We Need Evidence-Informed Deliberative Processes, Not Just More Evidence on Cost-Effectiveness.全民健康覆盖的优先事项设定:我们需要基于证据的审议过程,而不仅仅是更多关于成本效益的证据。
Int J Health Policy Manag. 2016 Nov 1;5(11):615-618. doi: 10.15171/ijhpm.2016.83.
6
PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT IN HEALTH TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT: A FRAMEWORK FOR ACTION.公众和患者参与卫生技术评估:行动框架
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016 Jan;32(4):256-264. doi: 10.1017/S0266462316000362. Epub 2016 Sep 27.
7
Priority-setting for achieving universal health coverage.实现全民健康覆盖的优先事项设定。
Bull World Health Organ. 2016 Jun 1;94(6):462-7. doi: 10.2471/BLT.15.155721. Epub 2016 Feb 12.
8
Making fair choices on the path to universal health coverage.在实现全民健康覆盖的道路上做出公平选择。
Bull World Health Organ. 2014 Jun 1;92(6):389. doi: 10.2471/BLT.14.139139.
9
Guideline group composition and group processes: article 3 in Integrating and coordinating efforts in COPD guideline development. An official ATS/ERS workshop report.指南制定专家组的组成和工作流程:COPD 指南制定中的整合和协调工作,第 3 条。美国胸科学会/欧洲呼吸学会联合工作坊报告。
Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2012 Dec;9(5):229-33. doi: 10.1513/pats.201208-056ST.
10
Mapping of multiple criteria for priority setting of health interventions: an aid for decision makers.多标准健康干预措施优先级设定图:决策者的辅助工具。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 13;12:454. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-12-454.